Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Corrections - Oriel Road, Carrickmacross, Monaghan
Hi Colm, On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:47:51PM +, Colm Moore wrote: I'm not an editor, so I would be grateful if someone could make the following corrections. The road marked Drummond Otra R135 here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.9694/-6.7140 appears to actually be Oriel Road: https://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Carrickmacrosshl=enll=53.969883,-6.703822spn=0.001309,0.003819sll=53.992634,-6.727495sspn=0.02094,0.06oq=Carrickmacrossdirflg=whnear=Carrickmacross,+County+Monaghant=mz=18layer=ccbll=53.969824,-6.70399panoid=Vs-QTpKrA2B--3p3M4_ogQcbp=12,224.73,,1,3.94 The history of the road in OSM shows that, up to a year ago, it was called Oriel Road and was renamed. The townland name Drummond Otra is used in various places (including the Regional Routes SI) which may be the source of the confusion. I've changed the name back. It seems likely that it is the R927, but the entry in the Roads Act 1993 (Classification of Regional Roads) Order 2012: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0054.html appears confused. Convent Lands Road is, presumably, actually Oriel Road. Google maps has Convent Lands at Bothar Eanna. Moyheross is spelled Magheross by the Ordnance Survey. This would appears to be the extent of the R927: https://maps.google.ie/maps?saddr=Unknown+roaddaddr=53.9690969,-6.7110419+to:53.9675068,-6.7144707+to:Castleblaney+Roadhl=enll=53.974616,-6.710672spn=0.027916,0.06sll=53.982743,-6.715114sspn=0.005236,0.015278geocode=FTaENwMdObaZ_w%3BFciANwMd_5iZ_ykr1H5IMbJgSDH9s5RNX7CjrQ%3BFZJ6NwMdmouZ_ylJmLJFN7JgSDEjnvznIaL-XQ%3BFUe2NwMdCoKZ_wdirflg=wmra=dmemrsp=3sz=16via=1,2t=mz=14 That looks like the only possibility. I've updated the ref on Oriel Road. The R135 is the former N3: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0054.html Yes, that shouldn't be anywhere near here. Take a look at the map (you may need to force a reload to update the map tiles) and let me know. Cheers, Andrew ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] mapping roads
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 09:06:30PM +, Donie Kelly wrote: I got nothing back. Didn't follow it up. The Garda website says it complies with the Regulations on the Re-Use of Public Sector Information: http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1442Lang=1 You might have better luck contacting the people at http://psi.gov.ie/, they might be able to clarify about reusing information in OSM. Cheers, Andrew ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk] Garmin Maps
Hi, On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 08:48:53PM -0400, Sami Dalouche wrote: The http://garmin.na1400.info/routable.php page contains only auto-routable maps, right ? My current need is to get : - routable maps for Quebec, Vermont, New Hampshire, and NY - hiking maps for Quebec, Vermont, New Hampshire, and NY But more generally, I think I would like to (and think it would benefit the OSM community if it were possible) be able to just go one one website, that presents me with all the maps I can download for a given (predefined) area, and quickly load it to my GPS device. There's also http://gpsmapsearch.com/ which links to other people's maps. This is the highest referrer to my own web page of Irish Garmin maps. Andrew ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk-ie] Rewording tertiary and unclassified in Wiki
Hi folks, Before editing the wiki on something as fundamental as highway tags, I thought I'd suggest some rewording here for the tertiary and unclassified highways, since some confusion arises since everything is at least L. Highway=tertiary Current: Unclassified (or Local) roads whose importance for through traffic is quite high. This can be the case both in urban and rural areas. Proposed: Local L roads whose importance for through traffic is quite high. This can be the case both in urban and rural areas. The choice of applying tertiary or unclassified in Ireland is subjectively chosen by you, the mapper. Highway=unclassified Current: No administrative classification. Unclassified roads typically form the lowest form of the interconnecting grid network. Note: This is not a marker for roads where we still need to choose a highway tag. Proposed: Local L roads of low importance for through traffic. These roads are the lowest form of the public road network. Note: Don't be misled by the name: Ireland does not have unclassified roads, we instead use this tag to indicate different levels of important in L roads. This is also not a marker for roads where we still need to choose a highway tag; use highway=road for that. Thoughts? Andrew ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] FYI: N Route re-designations as Motorways
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 06:42:18PM +0100, Thomas Bibby wrote: N7: Limerick Bypass section, but how much of it? From the roundabout at start of the dual carriageway bypass (junction with under construction motorway), to the R511 overbridge (a few hundred metres before the N7/N20 interchange roundabout, strangely) N20: Anybody know exactly how much of it? The SI [1] says from 660m south of the N7/N20 roundabout, which is about mid-way between the roundabout and the first offramp on the N20 (interestingly enough this offramp got a single blue sign showing the exit, none anywhere else on the N20), to where the N20 branches off and the N21 goes straight on. Just a thought, but are these points the official boundary of the Limerick Tunnel scheme, in particular the new N20/N7 interchange which is mentioned separately? The 50km/hr temporary speed limit on the N20 northbound starts quite a bit before you see any roadworks, for instance. Andrew ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk] Large Hadron Collider at CERN now in OppenStreetMap
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 06:28:15AM -0700, Karl Newman wrote: On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its not perfectly positioned and I think the circumference is a tad short but I made a reasonably good insert of the CERN LHC (and SPS) into the database last night in time for the first full circle beam test of the LHC, which has just successfully completed. So, for anyone wanting to know exactly where the two accelerator rings are in the world it's now possible to point them to OpenStreetMap. Another first for community mapping :-) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.2731lon=6.073zoom=12layers=0B00FTF I hope the data made the planet dump (JIT), in which case it should appear also on the Mapnik layer shortly. For now the two rings are tagged with highway=trunk and highway=primary respectively. They also carry tunnel=true of course. There are a couple of big notes tagged as well that confirm the highway tag is less than ideal and that something better needs to be used. But for now, since they don't connect with the road network I don't think anyone will be routing over them ;-) enjoy Cheers Andy Not sure if you should be chastised for tagging for the renderer or commended for the PR effort :-P Perhaps highway=footway, bicycle=yes, access=private isn't too far from the truth? :) Andrew signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] last person to edit?
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 08:53:50PM +0100, graham wrote: Thanks Shaun Simple when you know how. Odd though - I just corrected some roads someone had dragged off by a few hundred metres; the history shows me creating the roads 6 months ago and correcting them this evening, but nothing in between. Is there any kind of edit it doesn't show? If no nodes were added or removed from the way, the changes may only show up in the nodes themselves, and not the way. Can you check if that's the case? Cheers, Andrew signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tilesathome] Which layers for captionless?
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 07:07:54PM +0100, 80n wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Alan Millar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right now the wiki instructions say not to upload the z9-z11 captionless tiles; should that be changed? Yes, if that's what it says. Following on from that, captionless tiles should be uploaded for layers 1-8 now, too? And if I understand correctly, the final idea will be to have no tile layer at all, just captionless and transparent captions at all zoom levels? Andrew signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relations not always brilliant
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 01:33:31PM +0100, Steve Hill wrote: But a motorway which is not a continuous road (i.e. has gaps in it) is _not_ a single road - I see no reason why it should be treated as one. Maybe you could cite some examples of why you need to treat it as a single road, even though it has gaps in it? Can we not have both? (1) A relation which contains all the ways that define a road according to its official designation, whether a single road, or several disjoint pieces. and (2) A relation for that road's notional route, that contains the relation above *plus* the (usually obvious) connecting bits that give you a single, long distance route from A to B. Different people will find the two options useful. Or am I missing something here? Andrew signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relations not always brilliant
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 02:25:11PM +0100, Steve Hill wrote: Which bits you use to connect the disjointed sections are a rather arbitrary decision - should OSM be making such decisions? I mean, there is no officially documented this is how you get between these sections route so we would be making a route up arbitrarilly. Sure, for some stuff it might be obvious, but for a lot of stuff it isn't. Take the A31, for example - it joins the M3 near Winchester but then reappears on the westerly end of the M27. You might say that the M3 and M27 is obviously the missing link and add that to the A31 relation, but that would be completely unsuitable for cyclists. This really isn't the job for submitters, this is the job for a route planner program - submitters are supposed to be recording data, not making relatively arbitrary decisions about which routes people should take. Okay, I take your point. In Ireland I'm not aware of any such extreme examples (except the N3), with most disjoins being only a few hundred metres at most. In that case, would the use of highway relations be restricted to such cases where there is one *official* route, with differing refs? For example, National Primary Road 7 in Ireland is the entire road from Dublin to Limerick. It's called the N7, but for those portions where it's a motorway, it's the M7. In this case ref=M7;N7 would only be appropriate for the motorway if N7 was guaranteed not to appear. :) Andrew signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
