Re: [Talk-us] Slack: Do we need an Alternative (was Planning an import in Price George...)

[Jeffrey Ollie]

I have objections to the use of Slack in particular, and to the use of
real-time communication tools in general (not just Slack but other tools
like IRC, HipChat, Rocket.Chat etc.).

My objections to Slack in particular primarily come down to the fact that
using it puts too much control in the hands of a commercial entity. IANAL
and I haven't read the terms of service but I'd certainly be more
comfortable using open source software running on OSM servers.

My objection to real-time communication tools in general that it limits
visibility of and participation in discussions from less dedicated members
of the community.

First, the real-time nature of the communication means that noise tends to
overwhelm the signal. I don't keep Slack or other tools open at work - it's
just too distracting. When I get home in the evenings I'm not going to wade
through the past 24+ hours of discussion looking for fragments of
discussions I might be interested in. Some tools (like Slack) have
attempted to re-invent threaded conversations but I haven't seen them
widely used yet.

Second, most of the tools are only searchable from within themselves.
External search indexes like Google and Bing can't or won't index the
content. On some platforms (IRC in particular) there are a lot of people
that expect all discussions to be ephemeral and not archived at all.

That said, I'm not totally against the use of such real-time communication
tools. For things where real-time interaction is essential (Is X up? How do
I Y? Am I doing Z right?) it's great. For social chit-chat it's great. For
anything else I'm not so sure.


On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

> SteveA wrote:
>
> At least once, Clifford invited me to join Slack as well.  However, after
> reading Slack's Terms of Service Agreement (a contract of adhesion,
> really), I could not and do not abide with the ways which Slack (and other
> proprietary, not-open-source/open-data communication platforms) divide our
> community into "those who Slack" and "those who don't."  Even as Clifford
> has acknowledged this issue in these posts, I feel compelled to speak up
> about this again whenever I see this invitation to Slack again and again.
>
> I don't wish to throw rocks at the good process and results which happen
> because some of us collaborate on Slack.  I do wish to urge OSM volunteers
> to seriously (re-?)consider that there are well-established, perfectly
> useful communication methods (email, wiki, talk-us, face-to-face,
> meetups/Mapping Parties...) which do not require "shiny apps laden with
> hidden, commercial code" that ask us to cloak our communication into the
> private realm of a for-profit company.  As an open-source/open-data
> project, I remain puzzled why OSM volunteers do this.
>
> Perhaps what I'm suggesting (again?  I seem to recall it has been brought
> up before) is that if OSM uses a "live-collaboration communication app"
> that we either develop our own or choose some open-source version of one
> without onerous License Terms that MANY (not just me) find offensive.
>
> Is that possible?
>
> Thanks for reading.  I mean this in the best interests of OSM longer-term.
>
> SteveA
> California
> OSM Volunteer since 2009
>
> Steve,
> I must admit I like Slack better than some other forms of communications.
> For example, I don't participate on any OSM forums. IRC is nice, but the
> Slack, as a version of IRC, is just better. Since Slack was introduced to
> the community I've notice the talk-us mailing list traffic has slowed and
> even more so is the #osm-us IRC channel which for all practical purposes is
> dead.
>
> Communications within the community is one of the most important aspects
> of what makes our community thrive. We need tools that allow people to be
> engaged in discussions and process to be successful. Tools that people want
> to use. To me, seeing the number of people that use Slack compared to other
> forms of communications, means the community has chosen.
>
> I'm also part of a open source community that uses IRC and mailing lists
> to communicate. When Slack was introduced, just like OSM, traffic drop to
> nothing on IRC and mainly announcements on the mailing list. Part of that
> maybe because people use Slack in their day job.
>
> I don't wouldn't have any objections to another platform with more
> agreeable terms of service. But what specifically to Slack's terms is
> objectionable?
>
> I'm also interested in how others feel about Slack. Is it good for the
> community or should we look elsewhere?
>
> Best,
> Clifford
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>


-- 
Jeff Ollie
The majestik møøse is one of the mäni interesting furry animals in Sweden.
___
Talk-us mailing list

Re: [Talk-GB] House of Fraser

[Andrew Black]

On Sat, 9 Jun 2018, 01:57 Andrew Black,  wrote:

> If you are going to do it use fixmes, much more likely to get noticed than
> notes IMHO.
>
>>
>> Apologies. Might be better stated as "there are advantages both ways".
Round me there are LOADS of unresolved notes. Some it's not quite obvious
where it's talking about . Don't get me started on notes created
maps.me.


 To the extent I have sometimes changed things and later discovered they
were covered by notes. Hence I am loathe to worsen the situation.
But I accept a note plonked in the middle of a soon to close House of
Fraser is pretty unambiguous.


Note to self (pun accidental): when making an edit check for any notes in
that vicinity.


>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, 21:31 Michael Booth,  wrote:
>
>> If you are going to do it use the notes feature, much more likely to get
>> noticed than fixmes.
>>
>> On 07/06/2018 20:53, Andrew Hain wrote:
>>
>> House of Fraser today announced today that half their branches are to
>> close, listing which ones. Although shops should not yet be removed does it
>> make sense with this announcement (or others like it in the future) to put
>> notes or fixmes in the 31 locations involved?
>>
>> --
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing 
>> listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] House of Fraser

[Andrew Black]

If you are going to do it use fixmes, much more likely to get noticed than
notes IMHO.

On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, 21:31 Michael Booth,  wrote:

> If you are going to do it use the notes feature, much more likely to get
> noticed than fixmes.
>
> On 07/06/2018 20:53, Andrew Hain wrote:
>
> House of Fraser today announced today that half their branches are to
> close, listing which ones. Although shops should not yet be removed does it
> make sense with this announcement (or others like it in the future) to put
> notes or fixmes in the 31 locations involved?
>
> --
> Andrew
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing 
> listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-hr] GDPR i gasenje http://my-notes.osm-hr.org/ :-(

[Matija Nalis]

On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 02:59:10PM +0300, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> Gdpr se možda može zaobići. Jesu li korisnička imena jedino što je
> problematično? Što kad bi upisao ID note-a i onda ti on nađe sve noteove
> istog korisnika, ali ti ne ispiše tog korisnika? Malo je glupo, ali onda
> možeš umjesto korisničkih imena u bazu staviti inkrementalne id-eve.

Nisam bas sklon "zaobilazenju" zakona... a to gore bi moguce radilo i
ne bilo podlozno GDPRu, ali bi isto tako bilo prilicno neupotrebljivo 
za koristenje :(

Ne znam je li jos sto problematicno osim usernames (geodata nije u
toj bazi, ali tekst notes/komentara je); za to bi trebalo detaljnije
prouciti GDPR...

Takodjer bi trebalo pronaci i detaljno procitati sto je OSMF/LWG
napravio i slozio i napisao, vjerojatno ima nesto sto nam moze
pomoci. No ja nemam snage trenutno jos i za to :(

> Ili još bolje, umjesto korisničkih imena staviš hasheve tih imena, i onda
> samo ako upišeš pravo ime, dobiješ isti hash. Prije toga ni ti ni itko
> drugi ne može iz hasha dobiti tko je to. Osim ako brute forsa OSM bazu.

Napravio sam na githubu branch 'hash' koji radi po tome. 

Doduse tada gubimo case insensitivity (u trazilicu se tada mora upisati
tocna kombinacija velikih i malih slova u usernameu, sto se do sada
nije moralo)...

GDPR tu tehniku mislim zove pseudonymze, ali svejedno sumnjam da je
to rjesenje za nas, jer nas problem nije da ce netko provaliti na
server i ukrasti bazu sa inace tajnim podatcima (i tako su javno
objavljeni na planet.osm.org!), nego to sto ne navodimo korisniku
otkud nam podaci, sto radimo s njima, kako se moze obrisati od tamo
itd.

Isto tako, cini mi se da "obrada osobnih podataka" nastane vec u
trenu kada scripta napravi "bzcat planet-notes-latest.osn.bz2" i
pocne parsirati podatke za bazu, daleko prije bilo kojeg web user
interfacea.

Ali utukao sam tek desetak sati u citanje raznih sazetaka GDPR-a, pa
sam mozda u krivu.

hopefully ce hbogner znati bolje pa uspjeti napisati privacy
policy...  Samo treba vidjeti po kojoj osnovi, jer mislim da na
privolu ne mozemo ici (sto je i sreca, jer nikad ne bi skupili
privolu od svih contributora), a niti na zakonsku obavezu.  Mislim da
ima jos 2-3 labava nacina na koje se nekad smiju objavljivati neki 
privatni podaci sto nas mozda moze uciniti compliant, ali opet moramo 
sloziti dokumentaciju i napisati u Privacy Policy (uz ostalo) na sto 
od toga se pozivamo i zasto.

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.

___
Talk-hr mailing list
Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr

Re: [Talk-us] Planning an Import in Prince George's County, Maryland

[EthnicFood IsGreat]

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:28:10 -0700
From: OSM Volunteer stevea 
To: talk-us 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Planning an Import in Prince George's County,
Maryland


Clifford Snow  wrote:
If you haven't already joined our US Slack community, please sign up at 
https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/. The community can help you with build your 
import plan.

Having met Clifford two summers ago, I admired, marveled at (and congratulated him upon!) his 
awesome community organization skills.  I have "done OSM" with him via talk-us, 
face-to-face (we briefly spoke at SOTM-US Seattle), email and wiki to better our map — all using 
these terrific relatively freely-available methods of communication — and none of them requiring 
that I accept a License Agreement.  To be clear:  I have great respect for both Clifford and the 
open-platform communication methods by which we (and many others) "do OSM" together.

At least once, Clifford invited me to join Slack as well.  However, after reading Slack's Terms of 
Service Agreement (a contract of adhesion, really), I could not and do not abide with the ways 
which Slack (and other proprietary, not-open-source/open-data communication platforms) divide our 
community into "those who Slack" and "those who don't."  Even as Clifford has 
acknowledged this issue in these posts, I feel compelled to speak up about this again whenever I 
see this invitation to Slack again and again.

I don't wish to throw rocks at the good process and results which happen because some of 
us collaborate on Slack.  I do wish to urge OSM volunteers to seriously (re-?)consider 
that there are well-established, perfectly useful communication methods (email, wiki, 
talk-us, face-to-face, meetups/Mapping Parties...) which do not require "shiny apps 
laden with hidden, commercial code" that ask us to cloak our communication into the 
private realm of a for-profit company.  As an open-source/open-data project, I remain 
puzzled why OSM volunteers do this.

Perhaps what I'm suggesting (again?  I seem to recall it has been brought up before) is 
that if OSM uses a "live-collaboration communication app" that we either 
develop our own or choose some open-source version of one without onerous License Terms 
that MANY (not just me) find offensive.

Is that possible?

Thanks for reading.  I mean this in the best interests of OSM longer-term.

SteveA
California
OSM Volunteer since 2009




+1

Mark


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving building=building to building=yes

[john whelan]

My view is probably along the lines of as OSM matures using more
standardized tags will make it easier to extract meaningful data from OSM
mapping.

Having said that we still need the flexibility to use new tags.

That Building=building should be replaced by building=yes is fairly obvious
some other tag replacements may not be.

Cheerio John

On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 4:44 pm James,  wrote:

> I don't see a problem with this as the major concerns: big edit
> boundaries, what does it affect? are taken care of by documentation
>
> if building=building is not or was not a  wiki approved way of tagging,
> this seems more on the side of linting osm tags than it does a "mass blind
> edit"/import
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, 1:22 PM Mateusz Konieczny, 
> wrote:
>
>> building=yes is a standard way to mark building without specifying its
>> type. Editors wishing to specify building type would (directly or
>> indirectly, for example using StreetComplete) look through buildings
>> tagged as building=yes.
>>
>> building=building is an unexpected way to mark building without
>> specifying its type and therefore retagging this duplicate to
>> building=yes would improve tagging without any information loss.
>>
>> It would also (as an useful byproduct) remove this tag from popular
>> values at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#values and
>> ensure that it will not become proposed as a valid value by an iD
>> editor (at this moment threshold for building value is 14514 uses).
>>
>> Between 4000 and 5000 objects are expected to be edited. See
>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=building#map for a
>> geographic distribution.
>>
>> Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
>> bounding boxes. As this tag is on buildings it is not expected that any
>> object will force bounding box to be extremely large.
>>
>> For documentation page see
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_building%3Dbuilding_to_building%3Dyes
>> For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
>> that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving building=building to building=yes

[James]

I don't see a problem with this as the major concerns: big edit boundaries,
what does it affect? are taken care of by documentation

if building=building is not or was not a  wiki approved way of tagging,
this seems more on the side of linting osm tags than it does a "mass blind
edit"/import

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, 1:22 PM Mateusz Konieczny, 
wrote:

> building=yes is a standard way to mark building without specifying its
> type. Editors wishing to specify building type would (directly or
> indirectly, for example using StreetComplete) look through buildings
> tagged as building=yes.
>
> building=building is an unexpected way to mark building without
> specifying its type and therefore retagging this duplicate to
> building=yes would improve tagging without any information loss.
>
> It would also (as an useful byproduct) remove this tag from popular
> values at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#values and
> ensure that it will not become proposed as a valid value by an iD
> editor (at this moment threshold for building value is 14514 uses).
>
> Between 4000 and 5000 objects are expected to be edited. See
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=building#map for a
> geographic distribution.
>
> Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
> bounding boxes. As this tag is on buildings it is not expected that any
> object will force bounding box to be extremely large.
>
> For documentation page see
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_building%3Dbuilding_to_building%3Dyes
> For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
> that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-us] Slack: Do we need an Alternative (was Planning an import in Price George...)

[Clifford Snow]

SteveA wrote:

At least once, Clifford invited me to join Slack as well.  However, after
reading Slack's Terms of Service Agreement (a contract of adhesion,
really), I could not and do not abide with the ways which Slack (and other
proprietary, not-open-source/open-data communication platforms) divide our
community into "those who Slack" and "those who don't."  Even as Clifford
has acknowledged this issue in these posts, I feel compelled to speak up
about this again whenever I see this invitation to Slack again and again.

I don't wish to throw rocks at the good process and results which happen
because some of us collaborate on Slack.  I do wish to urge OSM volunteers
to seriously (re-?)consider that there are well-established, perfectly
useful communication methods (email, wiki, talk-us, face-to-face,
meetups/Mapping Parties...) which do not require "shiny apps laden with
hidden, commercial code" that ask us to cloak our communication into the
private realm of a for-profit company.  As an open-source/open-data
project, I remain puzzled why OSM volunteers do this.

Perhaps what I'm suggesting (again?  I seem to recall it has been brought
up before) is that if OSM uses a "live-collaboration communication app"
that we either develop our own or choose some open-source version of one
without onerous License Terms that MANY (not just me) find offensive.

Is that possible?

Thanks for reading.  I mean this in the best interests of OSM longer-term.

SteveA
California
OSM Volunteer since 2009

Steve,
I must admit I like Slack better than some other forms of communications.
For example, I don't participate on any OSM forums. IRC is nice, but the
Slack, as a version of IRC, is just better. Since Slack was introduced to
the community I've notice the talk-us mailing list traffic has slowed and
even more so is the #osm-us IRC channel which for all practical purposes is
dead.

Communications within the community is one of the most important aspects of
what makes our community thrive. We need tools that allow people to be
engaged in discussions and process to be successful. Tools that people want
to use. To me, seeing the number of people that use Slack compared to other
forms of communications, means the community has chosen.

I'm also part of a open source community that uses IRC and mailing lists to
communicate. When Slack was introduced, just like OSM, traffic drop to
nothing on IRC and mainly announcements on the mailing list. Part of that
maybe because people use Slack in their day job.

I don't wouldn't have any objections to another platform with more
agreeable terms of service. But what specifically to Slack's terms is
objectionable?

I'm also interested in how others feel about Slack. Is it good for the
community or should we look elsewhere?

Best,
Clifford
-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Planning an Import in Prince George's County, Maryland

[Mulea, Gregory]

I have realized I only replied to Clifford and not replied all, so our 
conversation has not been uploaded to talk-us.  Here is the summary of the 
convo.

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 9:53 AM Mulea, Gregory 
mailto:gregory.mu...@ppd.mncppc.org>> wrote
Thanks for the reply.  I have updated the wiki to include information about our 
tagging plans.  Let me know if that is sufficient.
Honestly I’m pretty new to OSM (I have done small basic edits but nothing 
compared to this) so I’s still learning.  I plan on using the JOSM editor to 
import these files but if there are better options I am happy to learn about 
them.  As for the conflating issue, I believe that JOSM has a method to check 
for overlap of polygons in which you can decided whether to keep or discard the 
copy (I plan to do this with the buildings polygon file).  As for point data, I 
am unsure as to how to test/check for already existing points (for example 
importing the libraries points file, if there is already an existing library I 
have not found a way to check for that).

Breaking the import up into small sections and using the Tasking Manager to 
work each section at a time is what I've done in the past. I use census voting 
districts - they seem to be a reasonable size. I believe you can use a python 
script or like I do, use postgresql to grab polygons/points by voting district. 
Ask Ian on Slack for permission to administer his TM.
JOSM has a conflation tool, but it was broke last time I tried to use it. If 
there is an existing building outline, I determine which one more accurately 
represents what's on the ground. If the import is, I select both outlines and 
use the "Replace Geometry" tools that comes with the utils2 plugin. If the OSM 
data is better, I copy any tags missing on the OSM data from the import over to 
the existing building.

Check out 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kirkland_Import
 for information on how we did that import.

Best,
Clifford


On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 10:51 AM Mulea, Gregory 
mailto:gregory.mu...@ppd.mncppc.org>> wrote:
Breaking up the import seems like a good idea.
I use ESRI’s ArcMap, how do the scripts compare between ArcMap and what you 
used?
Also, I have a relatively small file of 43 library points.  Would it be 
possible to do somewhat of a test import in order to test JOSM’s conflation 
tool and figure out different workarounds?
Thanks


The 43 points seems like it would be perfect to do with one import.  I use 
org2osm.py to translate shapefiles to .osm files. With just a bit of knowledge 
you should be able to write the translation script to go from shapefile tag to 
.osm tags. Then merge your library point with the existing. I'd be curious to 
learn how the conflation tool works. Instead of using ogr2osm.py you could load 
the shapefile into JOSM and fix the tags by selecting all of points to change 
tags. For example, change NAME= to name=. Depending on your address information, that make take more work. We 
use addr:housenumber, addr:street (with a spelled out street, no 
abbreviations), addr:city and addr:postal_code.
QGIS is the only application I've ever worked with. Most of what I do is run 
from the command line using postgis and gdal tools with the help of the 
ogr2osm.py translation tool.

Great, would I be able to do the test import today?  I also have a small file 
of buildings to test with polygons too.
I plan on just using the JOSM OpenData Plugin to load in the files and then 
changing the tags through there but I could give the py script a shot.

Is it necessary to split the addr tags into housenumber and street or would it 
be okay to leave it as addr:full?

Go ahead with the test import. When you are done, can you point to the area for 
review?

Great, The area will be in Prince George’s County, Maryland
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Planning an Import in Prince George's County, Maryland

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

> Clifford Snow  wrote:
> If you haven't already joined our US Slack community, please sign up at 
> https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/. The community can help you with build 
> your import plan.

Having met Clifford two summers ago, I admired, marveled at (and congratulated 
him upon!) his awesome community organization skills.  I have "done OSM" with 
him via talk-us, face-to-face (we briefly spoke at SOTM-US Seattle), email and 
wiki to better our map — all using these terrific relatively freely-available 
methods of communication — and none of them requiring that I accept a License 
Agreement.  To be clear:  I have great respect for both Clifford and the 
open-platform communication methods by which we (and many others) "do OSM" 
together.

At least once, Clifford invited me to join Slack as well.  However, after 
reading Slack's Terms of Service Agreement (a contract of adhesion, really), I 
could not and do not abide with the ways which Slack (and other proprietary, 
not-open-source/open-data communication platforms) divide our community into 
"those who Slack" and "those who don't."  Even as Clifford has acknowledged 
this issue in these posts, I feel compelled to speak up about this again 
whenever I see this invitation to Slack again and again.

I don't wish to throw rocks at the good process and results which happen 
because some of us collaborate on Slack.  I do wish to urge OSM volunteers to 
seriously (re-?)consider that there are well-established, perfectly useful 
communication methods (email, wiki, talk-us, face-to-face, meetups/Mapping 
Parties...) which do not require "shiny apps laden with hidden, commercial 
code" that ask us to cloak our communication into the private realm of a 
for-profit company.  As an open-source/open-data project, I remain puzzled why 
OSM volunteers do this.

Perhaps what I'm suggesting (again?  I seem to recall it has been brought up 
before) is that if OSM uses a "live-collaboration communication app" that we 
either develop our own or choose some open-source version of one without 
onerous License Terms that MANY (not just me) find offensive.

Is that possible?

Thanks for reading.  I mean this in the best interests of OSM longer-term.

SteveA
California
OSM Volunteer since 2009
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving building=building to building=yes

[Mateusz Konieczny]

building=yes is a standard way to mark building without specifying its
type. Editors wishing to specify building type would (directly or
indirectly, for example using StreetComplete) look through buildings
tagged as building=yes.

building=building is an unexpected way to mark building without
specifying its type and therefore retagging this duplicate to
building=yes would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would also (as an useful byproduct) remove this tag from popular
values at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#values 
 and
ensure that it will not become proposed as a valid value by an iD
editor (at this moment threshold for building value is 14514 uses).

Between 4000 and 5000 objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=building#map 
 for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag is on buildings it is not expected that any
object will force bounding box to be extremely large.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_building%3Dbuilding_to_building%3Dyes
 

For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account
 


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

[Diversity-talk] "The Post-Meritocracy Manifesto"

[Rory McCann]

Hi all,

Here's an interesting page & project:

https://postmeritocracy.org/


Meritocracy is a founding principle of the open source movement, and
the ideal of meritocracy is perpetuated throughout our field in the
way people are recruited, hired, retained, promoted, and valued.

But meritocracy has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those
with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in
technology. The idea of merit is in fact never clearly defined;
rather, it seems to be a form of recognition, an acknowledgement that
“this person is valuable insofar as they are like me.”

It is time that we as an industry abandon the notion that merit is
something that can be measured, can be pursued on equal terms by
every individual, and can ever be distributed fairly.


Some good points & values. 

Rory

___
Diversity-talk mailing list
Code of Conduct: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity/MailingList/CodeOfConduct
Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] [Hot-francophone] [Tagging-fr] Tags à Madagascar - Praticabilité des routes en priorités

[Pierre Béland]

Les outils de navigation routière se basent sur des éléments tels surface et 
practicability.  Pour une tell route, j'indiques habituellement surface=dirty, 
practicability=horrible. Et le horrible tient évidemment compte des dommages 
causés par la pluie et le traffic routier la rendant inpraticable - par exemple 
camions remorques.Exemple parlant 
https://twitter.com/irinnews/status/954452916483559424
 
Pierre 
 

Le vendredi 8 juin 2018 09 h 30 min 59 s HAE, Lukas Sommer 
 a écrit :  
 
 Salut Violaine.

> Est-ce que tu pourrais donner un peu plus d’élément, quel est ton moyen de
> locomotion, qu’est ce qui fait que la route n’est pas praticable ?
> inondations ? trop de gros trous ? dégradée un peu plus entre 2 passages ?

Voiture 4 × 4 ou voiture ordinaire ou moto.

Le plus grand problème est la boue : La surface de la route est très
moue, la voiture s’enfonce est ne peut plus sortir. Cela est
particulièrement fréquent en saison pluvieuse, parce que la route est
encore mouillée de la dernière pluie, et maintenant, très peu de pluie
est suffisante pour la rendre impraticable. (Parfois, il pleut dans
une partie de la ville, mais ne pas dans une autre partie, donc il
faut voir cas par cas.)

Le deuxième problème ce sont des passages ou il y a trop d’eau. Si
c’est plus de 30 cm d’eau sur le sol, ça devient compliqué. Le
problème des passages submergés dépend fortement d’où exactement la
pluie est tombée, est pour où l’eau est évacuée. Aussi en ville la
canalisation est parfois ne pas en bon état, ce que causent des
inondations sur des passages normalement bien praticables.

Le troisième problème c’est qu’après une forte pluie, souvent les
trous sont plus grands, et cela parfois rend impraticable une route
pendant des mois, parce que les dégâts ne sont pas réparés tôt.

> A Madagascar
> pour 2 routes en terre, l’une peut être nationale praticable en voiture,
> l’autre être une route qui s’enfonce dans la brousse et nécessité d’avoir un
> 4x4 voire treuil.

Oui. La page wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR :
Highway_Tag_Africa est une très bonne description de la situation : Si
une route est « primary » ou « unclassified » ne dépend pas de son
état ou de sa surface, mais uniquement de son importance dans le
réseau routier. On peut trouver dans le même pays des routes «
unclassified » goudronnées et des routes « primary » non-goudronnée.
Et effectivement, c’est aussi le cas en Côte d’Ivoire. Ladite page
wiki a aussi quelques autres astuces utiles pour les routes en mauvais
état. (À mon avis, ce qui est décrit sur cette page est très bien
formulé et ne vaut pas seulement pour l’Afrique, mais aussi pour le
reste du monde.)

Au fait nous avons développé pour openstreetmap-carto une possibilité
de visualiser la clé « surface ». Avec un peu de chance, ça sera
visible sur openstreetmap.org dans peut-être deux mois…

> quand on prend du recul, qu’on regarde une zone
> entière on va voir les tronçons de routes

> Par contre, vu que notre problème à nous (a Vatomandry)
> c’est les ponts, on pourrait penser (car à cette échelle on va pas voir les
> coupure d’itinéraire / les ponts qui manquent) que c’est possible d’aller à
> un tel ou tel endroit alors que c’est pas possible.

D’accord, J’ai bien compris le problème maintenant : Le calcul
d’itinéraire marche comme il faut, mais tu as besoin d’une
visualisation sur une carte qui de montre d’un seul coup d’œil des
zones accessibles et non-accessibles.

> Donc j’imaginais passer
> par une relation, un genre d’itinéraire voiture composé de ponts si yen a et
> de tronçon de routes et qualifier l’ensemble de l’itinéraire.

Cette idée je ne l’ai pas encore bien compris.

> Ce que j’aimerais c’est mettre en lumière et rendre accessible cette infos à
> tous, tous les itinéraires qui ne sont pas accessibles à cause de manque de
> ponts (c’est impressionnant).

Je n’ai pas d’expérience avec cela. Mais à
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Isochrone tu trouve une
introduction dans des calculs de ce genre. Et à
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/ tu trouve des analyses géométriques
pour OSM. Choisis « View : Routing » et après, à gauche dans le
registre « Overlays » tu désactives tous sauf « Islands ». Peut-être
cela peut t’aider.

À bientôt !

___
Hot-francophone mailing list
hot-francoph...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot-francophone
  ___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-it] Fontana / vasca

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

On 08/06/18 14:43, Cascafico Giovanni wrote:


C'è una ragione per assegnare historic=watering_place invece di un
eventuale historic=yes?

>
No, era una mia pensata specifica, una sorta di ripetizione



a meno che non sia in autostrada od in tangenziale
potrebbe essere ancora usata da escursionisit a cavallo.



historic=* non implica il non uso, a questo ci pensa il tag amenity=*.



Inoltre non mi pare i nodi natural=spring siano vincolati alle waterway.



No era una mia idea, in quanto se si mappasse la waterway, sarebbe 
naturale far cadere un nodo sull'"incrocio" con il tubo che esce dalla 
fontana e sarebbe una specie di sogiva che esce dal tubo.



--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[OSM-talk-be] Fwd: [OSGeo.be-Announce] FOSS4G.be - save the date - 25/10/2018 !

[joost schouppe]

And if there are enough OSM related proposals, we'll probably have a
special OSM track again!

-- Forwarded message -
From: Johan Van de Wauw 
Date: do 7 jun. 2018 22:20
Subject: [OSGeo.be-Announce] FOSS4G.be - save the date - 25/10/2018 !
To: 


Hello everyone,

After succesful yearly events since 2015, I have the honour to announce
that OSGeo.be and OSM Belgium will organise a next FOSS4G Belgium on
25/10/2018.

Like last years we are eager that Brussels Environment is again hosting the
event in the BEL building!

Keep an eye on this mailing list or our website ( https://2018.foss4g.be )
for calls for participation, sponsoring and

As always, feel free to get in touch if you still have any questions
related to the event. If you would like to help out with the organisation
or as a volunteer during the event - get in touch with t...@foss4g.be

Kind Regards on behalve ot fhe OSGeo.be and OSM Belgium team!

https://2018.foss4g.be

___
Belgium-Announce mailing list
belgium-annou...@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/belgium-announce
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Martijn van Exel]

Just to clarify, the links below are the challenge admin links, the
actual challenges would be accessed athttp://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3041 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3042 

We can easily prepare more of these challenges so we are interested in
your feedback and suggestions for other areas to do this in.
The challenges are based on output from the Cygnus conflation tool which
has a web interface here: http://cygnus.improve-osm.org/ , in case
you're interested in working with it yourself.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, at 01:02, Horea Meleg wrote:
> Hi everyone!


> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav
> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it
> with the community using MapRoulette Challenges.> As a starting point we 
> processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted
> ways which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in
> Tiger. We made two challenges, for two different areas:


>  * Jacksonville, Florida
>http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>  * San Antonio, Texas
>http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042>  


> All necessary information can be found in challenges description.
> Also, description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.> We'd love any 
> input and advice!


> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.


> Thanks!


>  


> _
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths - new site focusing on OSM UK footpath mapping

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,


Following on from the recent discussions regarding rights of way and the 
licensing of council data, I would like to announce that the initial - and very 
much prototype - version of 'MapThePaths' is now available.


http://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/


This site aims to be a platform to help map, and correctly tag, rights of way 
(and other walkable paths) in England and Wales.


Currently it is a viewer only, it does not yet offer editing facilities, and 
covers rural areas of England only for now (former metropolitan counties and 
urban unitary authorities have been largely excluded to minimise demands on the 
server).  It shows council rights of way (thanks to Barry Cornelius and rowmaps 
for this) superimposed on OSM paths (ways where 
highway=footway,path,bridleway,track,steps,cycleway or service). Both council 
data and OSM data is coloured by designation. OSM paths with no designation are 
shown as grey dashed lines.


You can click on the council paths (which are wider, transparent lines) to get 
the licensing status (is the data OGL?) - thanks to Robert Whittaker for this.


It uses various ECMAScript 6 features so needs an up-to-date browser (something 
from about the last two to three years, and not IE).


Future plans will include limited editing: in OGL areas only (this will be 
auto-detected, registered OSM users will be able to add designation and 
prow_ref to OSM ways without these tags).


It is also planned to allow users to easily find areas where there are large 
numbers of unmapped or untagged paths, and to allow non-expert users to leave 
notes (e.g.  'this is a permissive pat', 'footpath runs along left side of 
hedge') which can then be used by expert mappers.


At the moment, to minimise server constraints, OS VectorMap District has been 
used as the base layer. It's possible that this will be replaced by a Mapnik 
render if possible - the underlying database at the moment is MongoDB basically 
because it works very nicely with GeoJSON and can do geospatial queries.


It would also be good (as previously discussed) to allow an out-of-copyright OS 
map base layer - the project could also be used to help identify lost rights of 
way for 2026.


A companion Android app for in-the-field use will also begin development very 
soon.


Any other suggestions for features, or any suggestions for improvements on the 
colour scheme would be welcome.


Source code is on gitlab:

https://gitlab.com/nickw1/mapthepaths


Nick



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk] 1st version GDPR orientated privacy policy

[Simon Poole]

I've just updated the OSMF privacy policy to a version that takes the
GDPR  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
in to account and that was approved by circular by the OSMF board.

This is still a work in progress and we know that there are a couple of
points that need improvement. Outside of that, it is mainly a
reformulation of the previous policy pointing out in a bit more detail
what and why we are processing certain personal data.

The new version can be found in the same place as the old one
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_Policy and is what is linked
to from the OSM sign up page and other places.

Simon




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Martin Ždila]

Na Slovensku davame razcestnikom do name neskratene nazvy a na mape
www.freemap.sk ich skracuje renderer. Spolupracujeme aj s KST kde v ich
databaze skratky pouzivaju, ale na nase renderovanie sa od nich nikto
nestazoval :-)
-- 
Ing. Martin Ždila 
OZ Freemap Slovakia
tel:+421-908-363-848
mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk
http://www.freemap.sk/
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Jan Sten Adámek]

short_name používám, když ta zkratka není součást samotného názvu objektu, ale 
nějakého přívlastku, který se v OSM běžně přidává, třeba přírodní památka 
(short_name=PP …). Anebo když to má nějakou ustálenou zkrácenou formu názvu, 
ale teď si nemůžu vzpomenout, jestli jsem v Česku  něco takového vůbec potkal, 
tohle je typické spíš třeba pro Asii, kde u dlouhých názvů běžně vypustí 
několik slabik uprostřed „plného“ názvu.

Sten

Dne pátek 8. června 2018 12:47:34 CEST, Petr Vozdecký napsal(a):
> Mě to naopak přijde jako zajímavý podnět k úvaze. Přidáním official_name=*
> IMHO nic "nekazí" a současně lze říci, že celou tuto věc lze i téměř plně
> zautomatizovat (najít názvy s výskytem tečky lze a z nich vytvořit množinu
> odhaduji max 15 slov, kterých se to týká, ty automaticky "přeložit" do
> nezkráceného tvaru a vypadne myslím malá množina těch názvů, které bude
> potřeba "přeložit" ručně, případně k nim udělat překladovou tabulku pro
> další automatické použití...).
> V uvedeném changesetu jsem short_name=* nenašel, na co ho používá?
> 
> Jiná otázka je, zda postupovat u názvů rozcestníků podle uvedené
> wikistránky, protože pokud ano, pak by muselo být opačně, než je uvedeno
> výše: name=* v nezkráceném tvaru a do short_name=* dát zkrácený název jak je
> uveden na rozcestníku...
> 
> vop
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[majka]

On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 14:52, Jan Sten Adámek  wrote:

> Nevím, jaké problémy při renderování to má dělat. OsmAnd nemá problémy
> vykreslit ty rozepsané názvy a žádný z rendererů na OSM to nekreslí.
>

Mě se ale nelíbí zrovna tohle - vykreslovat název tak, jak ve skutečnosti
NIKDE není, je podle mě zvrácenost. A nutit render, který se rozhodne jména
vykreslovat (třeba zrovna téma paws v Locusu) aby se začal shánět po tom,
ve kterém "name" se schovává to, co je ve skutečnosti na místě?
Pokud se většina usnese na tom, že se jim to líbí, samozřejmě se
přizpůsobím (stejně jako jsem začala ty názvy rozcestníků psát s malými
písmeny). Ale líbit se mi to nezačne.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Jan Sten Adámek]

Ten rozepsaný nápis je, jak to lidé přečtou. U těch názvů ulic jsem souhlasil, 
že T. G. Masaryka asi nemá být rozepsané, protože lidé to skutečně čtou „té gé 
masaryka“, ale ještě jsem neviděl někoho (kromě malých dětí), kdo by četl 
„vyhl.“ jako „vyhl“.

Tohle není tagování pro TTS, tohle je obecně pro jakékoliv automatické 
zpracování. TTS je jen asi nejviditelnější projev toho problému, a ano, i u 
rozcestníků, OpenRouteService zavádí landmark-based routing (a OsmAnd to 
zvažuje), které může používat právě třeba rozcestníky pro navigaci. Počítače 
jsou prostě hrozně blbé v tom, jak rozvinout zkratky (obzvlášť když jsou 
nejednoznačené), a tedy nejen počítače, mě třeba trvalo poměrně dlouho přijít 
na to, co má být „prm.“ Následuji tak doporučení zkratky v name rozepisovat a 
snažím se udržet ty zkratky v official_name.

Nevím, jaké problémy při renderování to má dělat. OsmAnd nemá problémy 
vykreslit ty rozepsané názvy a žádný z rendererů na OSM to nekreslí.

Mimochodem na tom rozcestníku i na webu KČT je to psané v kapitálkách, takže 
OSM se stejně striktně nedrží toho, co je tam napsané.

Sten

Dne pátek 8. června 2018 12:42:23 CEST, majka napsal(a):
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 12:20, Tom Ka  wrote:
> > Ahoj, pri kontrolach a opravach rozcestniku jsem narazil na uzivatele
> > StenSoft a jeho editace nazvu rozcestniku a pridavani short_name,
> > official_name a rozepisovani ruznych zkratek na plne nazvy napriklad:
> > 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59113357
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4241530923
> > 
> > 
> > Zkousel jsem ho kontaktovat a pry vychazi z
> > 
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:N%C3%A1zvy#Zkracov.C3.A1n.C3.AD_.28
> > ned.C4.9Bjete_to.29 ,
> > coz je podle mne ale primarne pro nazvy ulic a podobne. Osobne se mi
> > tohle konani pro rozcestniky moc nelibi, znamena to mimo jine pro
> > generovani map (online i offline) zavadet nejakou slozitejsi logiku a
> > nazvy si upravovat. Co si o tom myslite? Ja jsem vzdy zadaval nazev
> > tak, jak je uveden na ceduli.
> > 
> > Diky za nazory
> 
> To rozepisování u rozcestníků je asi formálně správně, ale taky se mi to
> moc nelíbí.  Hlavně vzhledem k tomu, že ten "rozepsaný" název neexistuje
> vůbec nikde, ani u KČT.
> 
> Jen tak mimo, třeba konkrétně z té odkazované sady změn je třeba JC064
> trochu problém - na cedulích Pařez (zříc., odb.)
> , u tras KČT
> Pařez (odb. ke zříc.) . Co z toho je
> "official", ví jen KČT samotný... Komplikovat to ještě třetí, uměle
> vytvořenou verzí je docela na hlavu. Jediné ověřitelné je ale to, co je
> opravdu na cedulích.
> 
> Uniká mi ale trochu logika - když nemáme tagovat pro render, proč tagovat
> pro TTS? Kromě toho TTS u rozcestníků? Přidělávat problémy při rendrování
> map jen proto, aby se vyřešil jiný problém, který v téhle chvíli ještě
> vůbec neexistuje?
> Mimo jiné to rozepisování zkratek jsme tu už probírali u ulic, kde to místy
> nadělalo jen paseku.





___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Petr Vozdecký]

Ahoj,

myslím, že není třeba se "hádat" :) A také myslím, že v tomto případě
neexistuje "nesprávný" název. Existuje myslím výhradně jen:
1) vždy nějaký název uvedený na rozcestníku, někdy obsahující zkratku
2) v případě zkratky dovoditelný nezkrácený tvar tohoto názvu

V drtivé většině nejde o nijak sporné výklady, protože "rozc.", "ryb.",
"zříc."... je vždy jen zkratka zápisu motivovaná úsporou místa, nikoliv více
či méně zakotvenými "zvyklostmi", u kterých by mohlo být sporné, zda je
základní tvar "ryb. Rožmberk" nebo "rybník Rožmberk".

Napadá mě jen jediný příklad, u kterého výše uvedené nemusí vždy platit a
tím je již zmíněný "sv. Vít" etc., neboť pojem "svatý" má v psané a mluvené
češtině podobné postavení, jako akademický titul (píšu ing., automaticky čtu
inženýr).

Tedy - nezbývá než se shodnout, jak tyto dvě výše uvedené varianty názvů
tagovat. Samozřejmě nejlépe tak, aby jeden z nich byl name=*, tedy
implicitní např. pro základní mapové zobrazení.

vop

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: majka 
Komu: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
Datum: 8. 6. 2018 12:55:07
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku
"




On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 12:48, Petr Vozdecký mailto:v...@seznam.cz)> wrote:

"
...
Jiná otázka je, zda postupovat u názvů rozcestníků podle uvedené
wikistránky...
"



Asi takhle: na té uvedené stránce stojí mimo jiné i:

..." Pokud je název nesprávný, je-li zapsán plně, pak ho chybně
nerozvinujte. (Například:  Wikipedia-16px.png  Wilts & Berks Canal
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Wilts_%26_Berks_Canal#Name), Britské názvy
začínající na "St"
(https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/19609/saint-or-st-is-there-an-official-osm-policy)
(en).)" ... 




Takže se hádejme o to, co je v tomhle případě "nesprávný" název.


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] Fontana / vasca

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Il giorno 7 giugno 2018 18:31, liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu <
liste.gira...@posteo.eu> ha scritto:

> On 07/06/18 16:42, demon.box wrote:
>
>>
>> natural=spring
>> amenity=watering_place
>> drinking_water=yes
>>
>> la vasca la indico con amenity=watering_place perchè dici che non c'è?
>> tralascerei di indicare che oggi gli animali non ci bevono più e forse
>> alla
>> fine è la soluzione ottimale.
>>
>
> Aggiungerei historic=watering_place, lockable=no, e volendo creare la
> geometria della vasca, metterei anche un barrier wall, wall=brick, se si sa
> l'altezza anche height=*, ometterei il nodo del natural spring, almeno
> finchè non c'è un waterway.


C'è una ragione per assegnare historic=watering_place invece di un
eventuale historic=yes? a meno che non sia in autostrada od in tangenziale
potrebbe essere ancora usata da escursionisit a cavallo.

Inoltre non mi pare i nodi natural=spring siano vincolati alle waterway.
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Superato il passo delle 10.000 revisioni [1]! Direi che la qualità non è
male, solo lo 0.002% è da scartare. Inoltre da quello che ho visto  l'8%
delle correzioni sono prevalentemente sul name.

Total features: 20709
Features to validate: 20709
Features looked at: 10273
Validated twice: 854
Have corrections: 1679
To be ignored: 57

[1] http://audit.osmz.ru/
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Tom Ka]

OK, diky za vyjadreni. Dal jsem odkaz na diskuzi do komentare k changesetu.

Bye

Dne 8. června 2018 12:53 majka  napsal(a):

>
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 12:48, Petr Vozdecký  wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Jiná otázka je, zda postupovat u názvů rozcestníků podle uvedené
>> wikistránky...
>>
>
> Asi takhle: na té uvedené stránce stojí mimo jiné i:
> ..." Pokud je název nesprávný, je-li zapsán plně, pak ho chybně
> nerozvinujte. (Například: [image: Wikipedia-16px.png] Wilts & Berks Canal
> , Britské
> názvy začínající na "St"
> 
> (en).)" ...
>
> Takže se hádejme o to, co je v tomhle případě "nesprávný" název.
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Daniele Forsi]

Il 8 giugno 2018 10:49, Cascafico Giovanni ha scritto:

> Il giorno 7 giugno 2018 13:46, Marco Gaiarin ha
> scritto:
>>
>> Mandi! Martin Koppenhoefer
>>   In chel di` si favelave...
>>
>> > prova latitudine 45+55/60+16,04/3600
>> > e per la longitudine 12+40/60+27,3/3600
>>
>> Scusatemi, sarà sicuramente colpa mia ma... come faccio a cercare queste
>> coordinate in OSM?
>
>
> Se intendi sul portale openstreetmap.org, non credo sia possibile: devi
> almento eseguire le operazioni che ha detto Martin, p.es.
>
> 45+55/60+16,04/3600 = 45+0.91+0.004455 = 45.92112
> 12+40/60+27,3/3600 = 12+0.66+0.007583 = 12.67425
>
> e metterle nella barra indirizzi (in qs caso a zoom 17)
>
> https://openstreetmap.org/#map=17/45.92112/12.67425

vedo che funziona anche mettendo le coordinate 45.92112 12.67425 nella
casella di ricerca
in questo caso l'indirizzo del risultato è
https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=45.92112%2C%2012.67425#map=16/45.9211/12.6743
-- 
Daniele Forsi

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[majka]

On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 12:48, Petr Vozdecký  wrote:

> ...
> Jiná otázka je, zda postupovat u názvů rozcestníků podle uvedené
> wikistránky...
>

Asi takhle: na té uvedené stránce stojí mimo jiné i:
..." Pokud je název nesprávný, je-li zapsán plně, pak ho chybně
nerozvinujte. (Například: [image: Wikipedia-16px.png] Wilts & Berks Canal
, Britské názvy
začínající na "St"

(en).)" ...

Takže se hádejme o to, co je v tomhle případě "nesprávný" název.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Petr Vozdecký]

Mě to naopak přijde jako zajímavý podnět k úvaze. Přidáním official_name=*
IMHO nic "nekazí" a současně lze říci, že celou tuto věc lze i téměř plně
zautomatizovat (najít názvy s výskytem tečky lze a z nich vytvořit množinu
odhaduji max 15 slov, kterých se to týká, ty automaticky "přeložit" do
nezkráceného tvaru a vypadne myslím malá množina těch názvů, které bude
potřeba "přeložit" ručně, případně k nim udělat překladovou tabulku pro
další automatické použití...).
V uvedeném changesetu jsem short_name=* nenašel, na co ho používá?

Jiná otázka je, zda postupovat u názvů rozcestníků podle uvedené
wikistránky, protože pokud ano, pak by muselo být opačně, než je uvedeno
výše: name=* v nezkráceném tvaru a do short_name=* dát zkrácený název jak je
uveden na rozcestníku...

vop


-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Tom Ka 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 8. 6. 2018 12:25:19
Předmět: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku
"Ahoj, pri kontrolach a opravach rozcestniku jsem narazil na uzivatele
StenSoft a jeho editace nazvu rozcestniku a pridavani short_name,
official_name a rozepisovani ruznych zkratek na plne nazvy napriklad:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59113357
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4241530923


Zkousel jsem ho kontaktovat a pry vychazi z
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:N%C3%A1zvy#Zkracov.C3.A1n.C3.AD_.28
ned.C4.9Bjete_to.29,
coz je podle mne ale primarne pro nazvy ulic a podobne. Osobne se mi
tohle konani pro rozcestniky moc nelibi, znamena to mimo jine pro
generovani map (online i offline) zavadet nejakou slozitejsi logiku a
nazvy si upravovat. Co si o tom myslite? Ja jsem vzdy zadaval nazev
tak, jak je uveden na ceduli.

Diky za nazory

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 8.6.2018 v 12:20 Tom Ka napsal(a):
> Zkousel jsem ho kontaktovat a pry vychazi z
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:N%C3%A1zvy#Zkracov.C3.A1n.C3.AD_.28ned.C4.9Bjete_to.29,
> coz je podle mne ale primarne pro nazvy ulic a podobne. Osobne se mi

Určitě nezkracovat. Ale taky neprodlužovat.
Pokud se něco jmenuje "Pražský Hrad", tak nezkracujeme na "Pražský Hr."

Ale pokud se něco jmenuje "sv. Vít", tak neprodlužujeme na "svatý Vít".

A pokud se jmenuje rozcestník "Vyhl. Českého ráje (odb.)", tak se tak
jmenuje. Maximalně bych toleroval rozepsaní do alt_name. Ale ne v name=*.

Mirek

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[majka]

On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 12:20, Tom Ka  wrote:

> Ahoj, pri kontrolach a opravach rozcestniku jsem narazil na uzivatele
> StenSoft a jeho editace nazvu rozcestniku a pridavani short_name,
> official_name a rozepisovani ruznych zkratek na plne nazvy napriklad:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59113357
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4241530923
>
>
> Zkousel jsem ho kontaktovat a pry vychazi z
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:N%C3%A1zvy#Zkracov.C3.A1n.C3.AD_.28ned.C4.9Bjete_to.29
> ,
> coz je podle mne ale primarne pro nazvy ulic a podobne. Osobne se mi
> tohle konani pro rozcestniky moc nelibi, znamena to mimo jine pro
> generovani map (online i offline) zavadet nejakou slozitejsi logiku a
> nazvy si upravovat. Co si o tom myslite? Ja jsem vzdy zadaval nazev
> tak, jak je uveden na ceduli.
>
> Diky za nazory
>

To rozepisování u rozcestníků je asi formálně správně, ale taky se mi to
moc nelíbí.  Hlavně vzhledem k tomu, že ten "rozepsaný" název neexistuje
vůbec nikde, ani u KČT.

Jen tak mimo, třeba konkrétně z té odkazované sady změn je třeba JC064
trochu problém - na cedulích Pařez (zříc., odb.)
, u tras KČT Pařez
(odb. ke zříc.) . Co z toho je "official",
ví jen KČT samotný... Komplikovat to ještě třetí, uměle vytvořenou verzí je
docela na hlavu. Jediné ověřitelné je ale to, co je opravdu na cedulích.

Uniká mi ale trochu logika - když nemáme tagovat pro render, proč tagovat
pro TTS? Kromě toho TTS u rozcestníků? Přidělávat problémy při rendrování
map jen proto, aby se vyřešil jiný problém, který v téhle chvíli ještě
vůbec neexistuje?
Mimo jiné to rozepisování zkratek jsme tu už probírali u ulic, kde to místy
nadělalo jen paseku.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-cz] Rozepisovani nazvu rozcestniku

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, pri kontrolach a opravach rozcestniku jsem narazil na uzivatele
StenSoft a jeho editace nazvu rozcestniku a pridavani short_name,
official_name a rozepisovani ruznych zkratek na plne nazvy napriklad:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59113357
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4241530923


Zkousel jsem ho kontaktovat a pry vychazi z
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:N%C3%A1zvy#Zkracov.C3.A1n.C3.AD_.28ned.C4.9Bjete_to.29,
coz je podle mne ale primarne pro nazvy ulic a podobne. Osobne se mi
tohle konani pro rozcestniky moc nelibi, znamena to mimo jine pro
generovani map (online i offline) zavadet nejakou slozitejsi logiku a
nazvy si upravovat. Co si o tom myslite? Ja jsem vzdy zadaval nazev
tak, jak je uveden na ceduli.

Diky za nazory

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-lt] 100 žemėlapių

[Tomas Straupis]

Sveiki

  Startavo Lietuvos kartografų draugijos iniciatyva „100 Lietuvai
svarbiausių žemėlapių“:
  http://100lietuvoszemelapiu.lt/

  Galite pažiūrėti, pasiūlyti ir balsuoti už jau pasiūlytus žemėlapius.

P.S. Yra ir vienas mūsų žemėlapis ;-)

-- 
Tomas

___
Talk-lt mailing list
Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Il giorno 7 giugno 2018 13:46, Marco Gaiarin  ha
scritto:

> Mandi! Martin Koppenhoefer
>   In chel di` si favelave...
>
> > prova latitudine 45+55/60+16,04/3600
> > e per la longitudine 12+40/60+27,3/3600
>
> Scusatemi, sarà sicuramente colpa mia ma... come faccio a cercare queste
> coordinate in OSM?


Se intendi sul portale openstreetmap.org, non credo sia possibile: devi
almento eseguire le operazioni che ha detto Martin, p.es.

45+55/60+16,04/3600 = 45+0.91+0.004455 = 45.92112
12+40/60+27,3/3600 = 12+0.66+0.007583 = 12.67425

e metterle nella barra indirizzi (in qs caso a zoom 17)

https://openstreetmap.org/#map=17/45.92112/12.67425
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Décalage de données OSM

[Cyrille37 OSM]

Salut,

Le 08/06/2018 à 09:22, Pierre Jarnet a écrit :

Merci pour toutes ces précisions !
Je ne savais pas que ces fameux points d'alignement existaient et
étaient sûr, ça va certainement m'aider.


Enfin bon, tout reste relatif, ces points de mesures sont parfois 
espacés de plusieurs kilomètres, ce qui n'est pas l'échelle adaptée aux 
bâtis.


Les différentes planches du cadastre ne sont pas mises à jour au même 
moment, d'où de nombreux décalages.


Les orthophotos sont souvent plus récentes et mieux harmonisées.

Cyrille"è.


C'est donc partit pour le réalignement du bâtit… Je ne vais certainement
pas tout faire d'une traite mais par touches au fur et à mesure de mon
avancée.
Ça me fait un peu de récréation entre deux lignes de bus (du réseau
Penn-Ar-Bed) :)

Snutin.

Le 07/06/2018 à 12:38, Philippe Verdy a écrit :

Le cadastre est souvent basé sur les anciennes triangulations, mais n'a
pas toujours été révisé quand la triangulation (pourtant légale) est
entrée en application. Les planches sont localement correctes en termes
de taille et orientation (mais on trouve pourtant des décalages sur les
batiments dans les parcelles qui sont basées sur des déclarations ou des
estimations à vue de nez, avant que l'imagerie aérienne s'impose), mais
le positionnement absolu est correct. Pour le cadastre ce qui compte
c'est la taille des parcelles, les marques de géomètres au sol indiquant
les limites à ne pas dépasser pour une construction, ensuite le chantier
arrive, la construction a lieu à peu près à l'endroit prévu mais une
difficulté de terrain lors de la pose des fondations peut amener à
déplacer la construction un peu, ou le propriétaire change d'avis quand
il voit le terrain dégagé ou souhaite conserver des arbres ou se rend
compte qu'un chemin autour du batiment sera trop éétroit, ou qu'il ne
pourra finalement pas facilement loger une terrasse, ou un voisin
mécontent de l'ombre du batiment demande à ce que le bâtiment soit décalé.

Au final le batiment s'il est bien sur sa parcelle et respecte sa
surface au sol sera en l'état. Cela ne bloque pas la déclaration finale,
et la surface au sol ou habitable étant respectée, il n'y a pas lieu de
corriger (C'est plus strict en milieu urbain dense ou les alignements
sont imposés le long de la voirie et en terme de mitoyenneté quand les
batiments sont très proches les uns des autres ou accolés avec juste
quelques centimètres entre les murs contre les déformations pour éviter
qu'ils s'appuient les uns contre les autres, avec juste des joints en
façade et entre les toits car on ne pourra pas peindre et l'étanchéité
des murs doit être préservée).

Pour se repérer on peut chercher dans le cadastre la position des bornes
géodésiques de calage sur le terrain et aller vérifier leur position
effective dans la triangulation de référence actuelle. Mais dans nombre
de communes il y a peu de bornes de référence (en milieu rural, on
trouve souvent le clocher de l'église et sinon quelques points hauts
dispersés. Cependant je ne pense pas que cela aille à des écarts de plus
de 10 mètres, sauf dans des communes à très fort relief ou le calage "à
vue" depuis des points estimés de proche en proche a pu laisser des
imprécisions importantes (surtout si le point de visée n'était pas lui
même marqué par une borne géodésique suffisamment précise, par exemple
un point sur un aplomb rocheux ou un ancien poteaux dont le relevé était
ancien mais qui a été déplacé depuis.

Déplacer un géomètre coute cher aujourd'hui, les communes ne le font
plus et demandent juste que les travaux prévus soient déclarés et rendus
visibles par un panneau sur le terrain, pour que les voisins puissent
contrôler. Les négos de voisinage se font souvent sans intervention
directe de la collectivité. S'il y a lieu les propriétaires et voisins
se mettront d'accord pour le passage d'un géomètre que le propriétaire
paiera à ses frais et pour faire connaitre le bornage aux voisins. Ce
peut être des années après qu'on peut s'apercevoir que la déclaration au
cadastre en mairie n'est pas exactement ce qui y a été noté, mais passé
une période légale de recours, ou si un litige apparait mais est négocié
directement entre propriétaires, ou si un propriétaire conteste une
décision fiscale sur la surface qui lui est taxée, il peut y avoir une
rectification. Si personne ne vient se plaindre, ça reste en l'état.

Maintenant avec l'imagerie aérienne précise on a encore moins besoin de
borner les terrains. Mais refondre les planches cadastrales pour les
recaler est un boulot énorme que peu de communes rurales peuvent se
payer (surtout celles qui n'ont pas encore eu d'aides pour le vectoriser
et le mettre aux nouvelles normes et pour s'équiper en SIG modernes), et
même avec les nouvelles intercommunalités, les plus rurales ont de
larges territoires pas aussi précisément couvert et la vectorisation a
pu au départ se faire juste que les planches cadastrales existantes, à
peine réalignées/orthorectifiées et il s'écoule beaucoup de 

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Décalage de données OSM

[Pierre Jarnet]

Merci pour toutes ces précisions !
Je ne savais pas que ces fameux points d'alignement existaient et
étaient sûr, ça va certainement m'aider.
C'est donc partit pour le réalignement du bâtit… Je ne vais certainement
pas tout faire d'une traite mais par touches au fur et à mesure de mon
avancée.
Ça me fait un peu de récréation entre deux lignes de bus (du réseau
Penn-Ar-Bed) :)

Snutin.

Le 07/06/2018 à 12:38, Philippe Verdy a écrit :
> Le cadastre est souvent basé sur les anciennes triangulations, mais n'a
> pas toujours été révisé quand la triangulation (pourtant légale) est
> entrée en application. Les planches sont localement correctes en termes
> de taille et orientation (mais on trouve pourtant des décalages sur les
> batiments dans les parcelles qui sont basées sur des déclarations ou des
> estimations à vue de nez, avant que l'imagerie aérienne s'impose), mais
> le positionnement absolu est correct. Pour le cadastre ce qui compte
> c'est la taille des parcelles, les marques de géomètres au sol indiquant
> les limites à ne pas dépasser pour une construction, ensuite le chantier
> arrive, la construction a lieu à peu près à l'endroit prévu mais une
> difficulté de terrain lors de la pose des fondations peut amener à
> déplacer la construction un peu, ou le propriétaire change d'avis quand
> il voit le terrain dégagé ou souhaite conserver des arbres ou se rend
> compte qu'un chemin autour du batiment sera trop éétroit, ou qu'il ne
> pourra finalement pas facilement loger une terrasse, ou un voisin
> mécontent de l'ombre du batiment demande à ce que le bâtiment soit décalé.
> 
> Au final le batiment s'il est bien sur sa parcelle et respecte sa
> surface au sol sera en l'état. Cela ne bloque pas la déclaration finale,
> et la surface au sol ou habitable étant respectée, il n'y a pas lieu de
> corriger (C'est plus strict en milieu urbain dense ou les alignements
> sont imposés le long de la voirie et en terme de mitoyenneté quand les
> batiments sont très proches les uns des autres ou accolés avec juste
> quelques centimètres entre les murs contre les déformations pour éviter
> qu'ils s'appuient les uns contre les autres, avec juste des joints en
> façade et entre les toits car on ne pourra pas peindre et l'étanchéité
> des murs doit être préservée).
> 
> Pour se repérer on peut chercher dans le cadastre la position des bornes
> géodésiques de calage sur le terrain et aller vérifier leur position
> effective dans la triangulation de référence actuelle. Mais dans nombre
> de communes il y a peu de bornes de référence (en milieu rural, on
> trouve souvent le clocher de l'église et sinon quelques points hauts
> dispersés. Cependant je ne pense pas que cela aille à des écarts de plus
> de 10 mètres, sauf dans des communes à très fort relief ou le calage "à
> vue" depuis des points estimés de proche en proche a pu laisser des
> imprécisions importantes (surtout si le point de visée n'était pas lui
> même marqué par une borne géodésique suffisamment précise, par exemple
> un point sur un aplomb rocheux ou un ancien poteaux dont le relevé était
> ancien mais qui a été déplacé depuis.
> 
> Déplacer un géomètre coute cher aujourd'hui, les communes ne le font
> plus et demandent juste que les travaux prévus soient déclarés et rendus
> visibles par un panneau sur le terrain, pour que les voisins puissent
> contrôler. Les négos de voisinage se font souvent sans intervention
> directe de la collectivité. S'il y a lieu les propriétaires et voisins
> se mettront d'accord pour le passage d'un géomètre que le propriétaire
> paiera à ses frais et pour faire connaitre le bornage aux voisins. Ce
> peut être des années après qu'on peut s'apercevoir que la déclaration au
> cadastre en mairie n'est pas exactement ce qui y a été noté, mais passé
> une période légale de recours, ou si un litige apparait mais est négocié
> directement entre propriétaires, ou si un propriétaire conteste une
> décision fiscale sur la surface qui lui est taxée, il peut y avoir une
> rectification. Si personne ne vient se plaindre, ça reste en l'état.
> 
> Maintenant avec l'imagerie aérienne précise on a encore moins besoin de
> borner les terrains. Mais refondre les planches cadastrales pour les
> recaler est un boulot énorme que peu de communes rurales peuvent se
> payer (surtout celles qui n'ont pas encore eu d'aides pour le vectoriser
> et le mettre aux nouvelles normes et pour s'équiper en SIG modernes), et
> même avec les nouvelles intercommunalités, les plus rurales ont de
> larges territoires pas aussi précisément couvert et la vectorisation a
> pu au départ se faire juste que les planches cadastrales existantes, à
> peine réalignées/orthorectifiées et il s'écoule beaucoup de temps avant
> que les données vectorielles initiales sont finalement ajustées par des
> années de relevés sur le terrain en densité suffisante pour définir une
> nouvelle triangulation plus précise et finalement recaler le tout sans
> trop de dommages (et sans trop de 

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[Martin Ždila]

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 8:47 AM Miroslav Suchý  wrote:

> Dne 8.6.2018 v 07:12 Zdeněk Pražák napsal(a):
> > mohl bych poprosit o krátkou rekapitulaci co to umí pro neznalé
> angličtiny
>
> Kliknes do tri rohu ctyrhrane budovy a pak takhle oklikas dalsi budovy
> ve vesnici. Vse v ramci jedne dlouhe cesty. A pak kliknes Mapathoner ->
> Batch Orthogonal Buildings a plugin ti udela budovy.
>

Mimochodom pri pouziti BuildingsTools [1] JOSM pluginu stacia iba 3 kliky
(vratane zortogonalizovania). Pripadne len 2 kliky ak sa kreslia rovnobezne
budovy.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/BuildingsTools

-- 
Ing. Martin Ždila 
OZ Freemap Slovakia
tel:+421-908-363-848
mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk
http://www.freemap.sk/
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[majka]

On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 09:10, Jan Martinec  wrote:

> Dobrý den,
>
> TL;DR: Samozřejmě, tohle je jednoduchý nástroj určený jinam.
>
> Tenhle plugin vyrobil Qeef, jeden z účastníků mapathonů Missing Maps,
> původně pro svoji vlastní potřebu - tam se mapují vesnice v Africe, kde
> není v mapách nic (jako že doslova nic - maximálně velké silnice a vodní
> toky), a budovy jsou prakticky jen dvou půdorysů, kruh a obdélník. Na
> trasování z leteckých snímků je to velmi užitečný - šetří to desítky kliků
> a kláves za minutu, i v porovnání s předchozími pluginy, které se na to
> daly použít (nástroj "odhadni okraj vesnice podle budov" dosud neexistoval,
> to se muselo dělat podobným algoritmem "kouknu a vidím" v hlavě).
>
> Trochu jinak než tady prezentováno fungují ty obdélníkové budovy - bohužel
je třeba oklikat ne 3, ale všechny 4 rohy. Pak je vhodnější plugin
Buildingstools a případně extrahovat nepravidelné části - nebo je to tak
pro mě alespoň rychlejší.
Kdyby to fungovalo na ta 3 kliknutí - 1 strana + místo, kam protáhnout
(tedy kdekoli na protější straně), bylo by to praktičtější, a bylo by to
výhodné i pro chybějící budovy, které nejsou v RUIANu ale jsou v KM. V
některých místech jich takhle dokresluji poměrně značné množství.

Ty kruhové budovy a residential area jsou ale super, ty předchozí pokusy o
totéž byly dost na nic. Tedy, bylo to pořád lepší než drátem do oka :)
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[Jan Martinec]

Dobrý den,

TL;DR: Samozřejmě, tohle je jednoduchý nástroj určený jinam.

Tenhle plugin vyrobil Qeef, jeden z účastníků mapathonů Missing Maps,
původně pro svoji vlastní potřebu - tam se mapují vesnice v Africe, kde
není v mapách nic (jako že doslova nic - maximálně velké silnice a vodní
toky), a budovy jsou prakticky jen dvou půdorysů, kruh a obdélník. Na
trasování z leteckých snímků je to velmi užitečný - šetří to desítky kliků
a kláves za minutu, i v porovnání s předchozími pluginy, které se na to
daly použít (nástroj "odhadni okraj vesnice podle budov" dosud neexistoval,
to se muselo dělat podobným algoritmem "kouknu a vidím" v hlavě).

Pochopitelně v elektronizovanějších oblastech světa to moc praktické není -
trasování z dostupných registrů bude efektivnější vždycky, jen ty registry
musí existovat :)

Zdar,
Honza Piškvor Martinec


Dne 8. 6. 2018 8:53 napsal uživatel "Janda Martin" :

Dobry den,

  doufam ze kdyz to bude mozne date prednost trasovani dat z RUAIN/LPISu
pred kreslenim omalovanek.

Dekuji

 M



- Original Message -
From: "Miroslav Suchý" 
To: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 8:46:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

Dne 8.6.2018 v 07:12 Zdeněk Pražák napsal(a):
> mohl bych poprosit o krátkou rekapitulaci co to umí pro neznalé angličtiny

Kliknes do tri rohu ctyrhrane budovy a pak takhle oklikas dalsi budovy
ve vesnici. Vse v ramci jedne dlouhe cesty. A pak kliknes Mapathoner ->
Batch Orthogonal Buildings a plugin ti udela budovy.

Velmi podobne pro kulate budovy, akorat vybiras dva body a klikas jinde
v menu.

Kdyz vyberes budovy do vyberu, tak staci dat Mapathoner -> Pick
Residential Ared a nakresli ti kolem budov polygon rezidencni oblasti.

Mirek
-- 
,,,
   (o o)
  =oOO==(_)==OOo===
 )  mailto:miros...@suchy.cz  tel:+420-603-775737
(   One picture is worth 128K words.
 )Oooo.
 .oooO   (   )
 (   )) /
  \ ((_/
   \_)


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[Zdeněk Pražák]

díky za shrnutí informací
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Miroslav Suchý 
Komu: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
Datum: 8. 6. 2018 9:01:41
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner
"Dne 8.6.2018 v 08:53 Janda Martin napsal(a):
> doufam ze kdyz to bude mozne date prednost trasovani dat z RUAIN/LPISu 
pred kreslenim omalovanek.

Tohle je pro Mapathony Afriky, kde nic takoveho neni a budovy se kresli
podle Bingu.

Mirek

--
,,,
(o o)
=oOO==(_)==OOo===
) mailto:miros...@suchy.cz tel:+420-603-775737
( One picture is worth 128K words.
)Oooo.
.oooO ( )
( ) ) /
\ ( (_/
\_)


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Horea Meleg]

Hi everyone!

To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav mapping 
team is planning to process available open data and share it with the community 
using MapRoulette Challenges.

As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways which 
don't have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We made two 
challenges, for two different areas:

  *   Jacksonville, Florida 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
  *   San Antonio, Texas 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042



All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.

We'd love any input and advice!

If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.

Thanks!

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 8.6.2018 v 08:53 Janda Martin napsal(a):
> doufam ze kdyz to bude mozne date prednost trasovani dat z RUAIN/LPISu pred 
> kreslenim omalovanek.

Tohle je pro Mapathony Afriky, kde nic takoveho neni a budovy se kresli
podle Bingu.

Mirek

-- 
,,,
   (o o)
  =oOO==(_)==OOo===
 )  mailto:miros...@suchy.cz  tel:+420-603-775737
(   One picture is worth 128K words.
 )Oooo.
 .oooO   (   )
 (   )) /
  \ ((_/
   \_)


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[Janda Martin]

Dobry den,

  doufam ze kdyz to bude mozne date prednost trasovani dat z RUAIN/LPISu pred 
kreslenim omalovanek.

Dekuji
 M


- Original Message -
From: "Miroslav Suchý" 
To: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 8:46:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

Dne 8.6.2018 v 07:12 Zdeněk Pražák napsal(a):
> mohl bych poprosit o krátkou rekapitulaci co to umí pro neznalé angličtiny

Kliknes do tri rohu ctyrhrane budovy a pak takhle oklikas dalsi budovy
ve vesnici. Vse v ramci jedne dlouhe cesty. A pak kliknes Mapathoner ->
Batch Orthogonal Buildings a plugin ti udela budovy.

Velmi podobne pro kulate budovy, akorat vybiras dva body a klikas jinde
v menu.

Kdyz vyberes budovy do vyberu, tak staci dat Mapathoner -> Pick
Residential Ared a nakresli ti kolem budov polygon rezidencni oblasti.

Mirek
-- 
,,,
   (o o)
  =oOO==(_)==OOo===
 )  mailto:miros...@suchy.cz  tel:+420-603-775737
(   One picture is worth 128K words.
 )Oooo.
 .oooO   (   )
 (   )) /
  \ ((_/
   \_)


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Plugin Mapathoner

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 8.6.2018 v 07:12 Zdeněk Pražák napsal(a):
> mohl bych poprosit o krátkou rekapitulaci co to umí pro neznalé angličtiny

Kliknes do tri rohu ctyrhrane budovy a pak takhle oklikas dalsi budovy
ve vesnici. Vse v ramci jedne dlouhe cesty. A pak kliknes Mapathoner ->
Batch Orthogonal Buildings a plugin ti udela budovy.

Velmi podobne pro kulate budovy, akorat vybiras dva body a klikas jinde
v menu.

Kdyz vyberes budovy do vyberu, tak staci dat Mapathoner -> Pick
Residential Ared a nakresli ti kolem budov polygon rezidencni oblasti.

Mirek
-- 
,,,
   (o o)
  =oOO==(_)==OOo===
 )  mailto:miros...@suchy.cz  tel:+420-603-775737
(   One picture is worth 128K words.
 )Oooo.
 .oooO   (   )
 (   )) /
  \ ((_/
   \_)


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz