Re: [OSM-talk] Serious JOSM performance degradation
I posted a topic on this matter in OpenStreetMap Forum>Editors on the very same day as this thread was started, by coincidence, and directed to this mailing list by SomeoneElse. I received helpful replies and believe I have succeeded in overcoming the slow responses we were experiencing as a result. My reply is here: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=60403. I should be interested to learn if it helps others. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-GB] The OSM UK map
I wish to add my own pennies’ worth from a walker’s and mapper’s perspective on three matters: 1. The portrayal of barriers: we know kissing gates are not rendered in OSM but are rendered in Andy Townsend’s map. In neither case, though, do barriers stand out strongly enough, in my opinion. I created coloured images of a gate, kissing gate and stile for use with my Garmin eTrex Legend many years ago for this reason. I continue to use them now in Locus Map on my smartphone. I wish more attention would be applied; to place an appropriate image within a square, even, so that they are more visible. 2. Permissive paths: I do not understand “permissive paths need showing; Andy's cartography does not yet do this but again this is something I have experience with.” Woodhouse Farm in Ipsden, South Oxfordshire has provided a permissive footpath and permissive bridleways. Both are shown on Andy’s map (https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15=53.11419=-1.31171): the footpath is overlaid with a pink dashed line and the bridleway is shown as others, simply. I wonder what is the intention so far as permissive paths are concerned? Woodhouse Farm has done walkers and horse riders a tremendous service by making these paths available. The alternative PRoW route would have to be through woodland, obscuring otherwise beautiful views, which we can enjoy so much now. 3. Writing of beautiful views, my final item concerns scenic paths: I have commented elsewhere that I wish paths with scenic views could be treated like the road atlases I remember where a green ribbon was placed alongside such roads. I have been unaware that “description” tags have been used in OSM in the same way. I wonder, though, what purpose such a tag achieves, or could achieve? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] British National Grid coordinates in JOSM
Stuart Choosing “East/North” tab from Tools>Add node and against “Projected coordinates:” inputting full coordinates from the BNG origin, such as “474795 178597” (Eastings metres before Northings) works, so far as I see. Anyone having 100-Kilometre two-letter grid references would need to use an OS to Cartesian converter, first. I appreciate this is not using “Jump to position” but it will get you to where you want to be at the expense of having to delete the node created, only. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] British National Grid coordinates in JOSM
I have got round to resetting the map projection in JOSM to EPSG:27700 (OSGB 1936 / British National Grid), finally. I am surprised to find northings before eastings in the bottom left-hand corner of JOSM, when we reference BNG positions eastings before northings. I wonder if this has something to do with the way latitude is referenced before longitude, usually? I doubt this can be changed in JOSM but wondered what others know? It is rather confusing. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Barriers and PRoWs
I thank Roland so much for taking the time to read my message and provide examples; I am indebted to him. Might I request just one enhancement: could the barrier locations be shown on the ways to which they relate in the case of > 1. to identify PRoWs having stiles? I fully accept I did not request that, specifically. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Barriers and PRoWs
Andy I thank you for your prompt reply; that is useful to know and I shall bookmark your link. It is pleasing to see my PRoW references being put to good use alongside the ways, too. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Rendering kissing gates in OSM
I wonder why kissing gates are not rendered in OpenStreetMap – certainly in the Standard version? Their installation in place of stiles in my part of South Oxfordshire is increasing apace thanks to the work of the Chiltern Society. Are they a particularly GB or UK phenomenon and, as such, not considered to be of sufficient importance to act upon? Can a case be made? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Barriers and PRoWs
I record all barriers - gate, kissing gate and stile - as I walk every PRoW (Public Right of Way) in the Oxfordshire Chilterns parish by parish. I add them and prow_ref values in the form of "Checkendonh FP 12", for example, to OSM. I discovered three cases on my walk in Ipsden last week where stiles had been replaced by kissing gates. There are two large caveats regarding OSM, of course: 1. the completeness, or otherwise, of such information and 2. the currency of the information. I have been labouring with how to improve this situation. These are my thoughts: I wish to link the barrier node to the PRoW way on which it is situated. My ability to construct queries in Overpass Turbo is extremely limited and to the Wizard only. I can query barrier=stile, for example, but am at a loss when it comes to operators such as 'and'. I should be most grateful for assistance in achieving the following: 1. to identify PRoWs having stiles, say 2. to invert and obtain PRoWs not having stiles 3. to obtain such results for an individual civil parish, either by selecting those ways within an admin level 10 boundary named "Checkendon", say, or selecting those PRoWs whose prow_ref value contains "Checkendon" 4. to be able to export such results to a tabular form How much is achievable in Overpass Turbo, or what is required in addition? Please note: I use JOSM always as my editor. Information like this would allow me to know where to concentrate my checks. Chiltern Society representatives lead me to understand such information would be useful for its own purposes and I should be pleased to do all I can to help. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Barriers and PRoWs
I record all barriers - gate, kissing gate and stile - as I walk every PRoW (Public Right of Way) in the Oxfordshire Chilterns parish by parish. I add them and prow_ref values in the form of "Checkendonh FP 12", for example, to OSM. I discovered three cases on my walk in Ipsden last week where stiles had been replaced by kissing gates. There are two large caveats regarding OSM, of course: 1. the completeness, or otherwise, of such information and 2. the currency of the information. I have been labouring with how to improve this situation. These are my thoughts: I wish to link the barrier node to the PRoW way on which it is situated. My ability to construct queries in Overpass Turbo is extremely limited and to the Wizard only. I can query barrier=stile, for example, but am at a loss when it comes to operators such as 'and'. I should be most grateful for assistance in achieving the following: 1. to identify PRoWs having stiles, say 2. to invert and obtain PRoWs not having stiles 3. to obtain such results for an individual civil parish, either by selecting those ways within an admin level 10 boundary named "Checkendon", say, or selecting those PRoWs whose prow_ref value contains "Checkendon" 4. to be able to export such results to a tabular form How much is achievable in Overpass Turbo, or what is required in addition? Please note: I use JOSM always as my editor. Information like this would allow me to know where to concentrate my checks. Chiltern Society representatives lead me to understand such information would be useful for its own purposes and I should be pleased to do all I can to help. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Select and correct a discovered key duplication of sorts in JOSM
I return to this thread because there is something I do not understand. I wish not to make an error undertaking the change I plan. I queried ‘ref:chiltern_society=* within South Oxfordshire in Overpass Turbo and exported the result to JOSM. Selecting all, and viewing the results I see in excess of 3,000 unset values against the keys. ‘ref_chiltern_society’ reads ‘<220 different, 3416 unset>’, for example. ‘prow_ref’ shows the same, fortunately, because the numbers should match. I fail to understand the number of unset values if I have queried a particular key. Why are there not 220 ways selected? I ran the query without nodes and relations and the result was the same. I believe it would be acceptable to edit the tags in question but am concerned to know the answer before I do so. One further question: how do I search for the keys ‘ref:chiltern_society’ and ‘source:prow_ref’ in JOSM? It appears that the use of a colon is not recognised in these cases because of its use in other circumstances? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Portraying and labelling Countryside Access Map alignments and paths actually walked
I apologise to everyone for making a mess of this thread’s title and replying twice with the same content. I shall give myself one hundred lines (for those who remember the punishment)! --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Portraying and labelling Countryside Access Map
It is fortunate for me that Oxfordshire County Council makes its Public Rights of Way shown in its Countryside Access Map downloadable. I have been able to load data in .kml format by civil parish to my ‘phone as an overlay to OSM and follow the paths, track recording as I walk. This allows both official and unofficial ways to be shown in appropriate circumstances (I appreciate not all will be appropriate). Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Portraying and labelling Countryside Access Map
It is fortunate for me that Oxfordshire County Council makes its Public Rights of Way shown in its Countryside Access Map downloadable. I have been able to load data in .kml format by civil parish to my ‘phone as an overlay to OSM and follow the paths, track recording as I walk. This allows both official and unofficial ways to be shown in appropriate circumstances (I appreciate not all will be appropriate). Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway
Jerry I thank you for your helpful reply. One of my difficulties with Restricted Byways is the use of motor_vehicle=no as shown in Robert Whittaker’s table, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/PRoW_Table. I use vehicle=yes in almost all cases, but there are properties on Restricted Byways, as in this case, where I judge that tag to be inappropriate, to say the least. Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway
David I should have made it clearer: the two signs of which I wrote are one above the other at the start of the one Restricted Byway – that, perhaps, is the complication. Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Portraying and labelling Countryside Access Map alignments and paths actually walked
I should be interested to learn the general consensus regarding definitive alignments of Public Rights of Way and paths actually walked, and whether contributors have similar predicaments to mine. I have two cases in Shiplake, Oxfordshire: 1. Shiplake FP 37 Footpath #528052488 Changeset #52405541 I had labelled the straight line path to the kissing gate before the railway as Shiplake FP 37, originally. Since devoting my time to adding PRoW information in the Oxfordshire Chilterns and using Oxfordshire County Council’s Countryside Access Map, I have become aware of official path alignments. I pondered long and hard over this issue. I decided, finally, that it would be incorrect to label the straight line to the kissing gate before the railway as footpath 37, although this is the path used for a long time, and it makes no sense to walk the official alignment in an open, grassed field. There has been nothing official to change its alignment, as far as I am aware, however. I felt the best solution was to map footpath 37 as the Countryside Access Map shows, label it as such, and re-label the straight line as foot=yes, highway=footway alone. Should anything arise to prevent that, it can be removed instantly without affecting anything else. 2. Shiplake FP 10 Footpath #23639524 Changeset #52419186 The opposite applies to footpath 10: walkers in this case take the right-angled fence line from the stile (at the junction with Shiplake FP 11) towards Plough Lane while the Countryside Access Map shows footpath 10 crossing the field diagonally from a point before the stile. This has the effect of labelling the short section immediately before the stile wrongly as footpath 10 when it should be footpath 11. I plan to visit the site and alter OSM with the same attitude as for footpath 37. With regards Bob Hawkins --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway
I wished to attach an image of road signs in Shiplake, Oxfordshire, but was informed the file was too large. In the absence of the image, the two signs read as follows: 1. In white on blue: Oxfordshire County Council/No vehicles beyond this point except for access. 2. In white on green: RESTRICTED BYWAY/PRIVATE ROAD/NO vehicle access except for residents. I should appreciate views on the correct and complete treatment for access, motor_vehicle and vehicle keys, or anything else in this case, bearing in mind routing. I find it difficult to know how to tag Restricted Byways correctly, often. The Way is 25506222. With regards Bob Hawkins --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Select and correct a discovered key duplication of sorts in JOSM
My failing brain disturbs me at times: Edit>Preferences>Remote Control>Enable remote control! --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Select and correct a discovered key duplication of sorts in JOSM
Dan I am most grateful for your immediate and constructive reply. I am used to Overpass Turbo and think it is a brilliant resource but lack the knowledge to construct any but the simplest queries. I understand what you write about bulk uploading. I am confident that few, if any, entries will be from other OSM contributors – it was something I wanted to do to provide information to users of the Chilterns while adding standardised Public Rights of Way references, as the Chiltern Society has its own path numbering system that it uses in its publications. It is great to see the total extent of my actions, which I should not have been able to create in JOSM. I am surprised to find I have been so far afield! I must mention at this point, I had completely overlooked the presence of a checkbox, “case sensitive” in JOSM until I had posted my message! I think I agree the key should be completely lower case as that is the usual structure. It was second nature to use initial capitals for a proper name. I regret I have no success exporting the data. I have JOSM open but receive the message, “Remote control not found. :( Make sure JOSM is already running and properly configured.” which surprised me because I have used the remote control facility before and work with the latest update always. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Select and correct a discovered key duplication of sorts in JOSM
I discovered to my dismay yesterday while I was adding/updating Public Rights of Way in JOSM that I have been using a mix of initial upper case and lower case alone for a key I created: ref:Chiltern_Society and ref:chiltern_society. I have tried searches that will select Chiltern_Society, say, by using a “C” in the search, for case sensitive, without success. I have covered a large amount of South Oxfordshire with my additions and updates. I have three questions, I guess: 1. how do I search this whole area of OSM in my search to know that all cases have been found? 2. what should the key be, now that I find myself in this situation: ref:Chiltern_Society or ref:chiltern_society? 3. what would be the best method of changing all deemed to be incorrect without carrying out changes singly? I appreciate this matters not at all so far as the data is concerned. Having discovered it, however, I should prefer not to have to live with it. Furthermore, will the two keys remain in the list of keys displayed when adding or editing tags? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way
Adam The parishes are mapped already. I like your suggestion of adding a note in each set of tags, referencing the other prow_ref. To all I lack knowledge about these sorts of things: would a query, in Overpass Turbo, for example, recognise a single prow-ref’s two values that are separated by a semi-colon? Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way
Ed I must not have made clear the situation: the bridleway is coincident with the borders of two parishes, carrying a route code for each parish, not a way crossing parish boundaries. Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way
David I thank you for your reply. I should be interested in further comments on prow_ref=Checkendon BR 28;Stoke Row BR 15. Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way
I have discovered a situation in South Oxfordshire where a single bridleway has two route codes: 160/28/* and 368/15/*. The Definitive Statement Remarks read, “Also numbered BR 15 in Stoke Row” for Checkendon parish and “Also numbered BR 28 in Checkendon” for Stoke Row parish, which is borne out by the Oxfordshire Countryside Access Map. Keys cannot be duplicated - prow_ref in this case - so I wonder what the solution might be? I have in mind any Overpass Turbo or other queries that might be made, which will return one case only at the moment. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] What to use to obtain OSM tag information in the field?
I use Locus Map with offline OSM data loaded on my Android ‘phone when walking. The one feature lacking for checking PRoWs in the field, for example, is the capacity to view OSM tags. I am aware of Vespucci that will allow the immediate area to be downloaded and referenced, with which I have had mixed success. I wonder what facilities others use in such situations? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Administrative boundaries: polygons or polylines?
Colin The answer might lie with role=outer. I applied it to Nettlebed in JOSM as a test, uploaded the change and ran a new query in Overpass turbo. Nettlebed appears as a polygon now. It seems I should apply it to all my cases for best practice, as you write, because it does appear other software might be adversely affected by its absence. I thank you for your constructive input. With regards Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] The Chilterns AONB boundary
Paul, Jon and Robert I thank you all for your very prompt and constructive replies. I have downloaded the AONB boundaries that Jon pointed me to, in both .tab and .shp format (I am amazed always at what valuable information to hand people have and the wonderful benefit of forums and mailing lists!). The boundaries seem to be just what I was looking for. I should make clear: my use of The Chilterns AONB boundary is for my purpose only to assist the delineation of my area of interest. Bob --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] The Chilterns AONB boundary
I am a retired cartographer who enjoys extending his connection with and love of mapping by contributing to OpenStreetMap (OSM). My current project is to improve Public Rights of Way (PROW) attributes and add their PROW and Chiltern Society references to ways in OSM. I am concentrating on Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire because that is my geographical area. Their local authorities make available downloads of their Public Rights of Way and I have Ordnance Survey OpenData civil parish boundary data, too. It would be most useful to have a digital boundary of the Chilterns AONB. I have searched the internet and cannot find such a file to download. I communicated with Lucy Murfett, Planning Officer at Chilterns Conservation Board and received this reply: Dear Bob, Thanks for your message and great that you are able to give your time to improving this map resource. I am attaching an AONB boundary map with an OS base. I love using GIS but I’m afraid I am not knowledgeable about how to share layers or know whether we have permission to do this. Have you tried accessing the AONB boundary on the Government’s websites: http://www.magic.gov.uk/ or https://data.gov.uk/data/map-preview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geostore.com%2FOGC%2FOGCInterface%3FSERVICE%3DWMS%26UID%3DUDATAGOV2011%26PASSWORD%3Ddatagov2011%26INTERFACE%3DENVIRONMENT%26LC%3D8000n=55.816w=-6.236e=2.072s=49.943 Neither of these sites seem to offer the opportunity to download a digital file. I wonder if an OSM user here can help? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Administrative boundaries and parent/child relations
I am interested to learn other contributors' thoughts on the benefits, or otherwise, of adding child relations to parents for hierarchical United Kingdom administrative areas as in county/local authority district/civil parish or unitary authority/civil parish, for example. With the recent benefit of OS OpenData Boundary-Line, should it be widely practised? Is it worthwhile to add electoral boundaries and apply to them, also? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] How to use relations for The Chiltern Way and its extensions
The Chiltern Way has a North Extension, a South Extension and, new in 2010, a Berkshire Loop. Perhaps this is true of some other long-distance paths. The Chiltern Way is shown at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_Kingdom_Long_Distance_Paths as only 33% complete. As the South Extension and part of the Berkshire Loop are within my area of interest in South Oxfordshire, I should like to gradually add them as relations to the already-mapped ways in order to increase that percentage. I should be interested to learn other mappers' views: should the three extensions be part of one existing Chiltern Way relation, or relations in their own right, or both? If part of one existing Chiltern Way relation, how can the three extensions be identified separately?___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Relations
I have been following with interest the recent posts regarding the creation of administrative and electoral boundaries in OpenStreetMap. OS 1:25000 out of copyright maps now available for my area plus other non-copyright information I have, allow me to contribute. However, I do find relations confusing and there does not appear to be much written on the subject to help. I use JOSM and should appreciate comments on the following: New civil parish boundary, for example 1) Create a new relation. 2) Select all ways that form part of a given boundary, such as roads, paths and waterways, and add that selection to the new relation. 3) Any ways forming part of a boundary not already in the OSM database must be created, selected and added to the relation. 4) What happens if a boundary crosses open countryside not apparently following any feature, not even a wood edge or fence? Must a way with a boundary key and value be created? Then, surely, all existing ways forming part of a boundary must have boundary keys and values added? Does it follow, then, that the first step is to actually add a boundary key and value to all existing ways forming the boundary? 5) I assume the boundary should not be created as a completely separate entity, but that it should make use of existing ways where they form part of the boundary. 6) How do hierarchies in administrative boundaries work? I see a way in the River Thames tagged as a waterway and county boundary only with key=admin_level/value=6, key=left:county/value=Buckinghamshire, key=right:county/value=Berkshire;Oxfordshire). Is this correct, or should this boundary information be in the relation only? In other words, should all administrative boundary ways simply have key=boundary/value=administrative? 7) Is there any meaning to the order of the ways in a relation? For example, the selected relation editor offers two buttons: Add all primitives selected in the current dataset after the last member and Add all primitives selected in the current dataset before the first member. 8) What is a 'primitive'? 9) Is a boundary relation seen to be complete once the final way connects to the first way? I am sure I could compile many more questions. By no means do I demean the tremendous work done for OSM contributors - I am full of admiration, but I do wonder why, when so much preparatory work has gone into the construction of something, there is sometimes so little associated explanation or help. I should so appreciate any further information on the use of relations, and with particular regard at the moment for administrative boundaries, which seem to be concentrating so many minds.___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] OS 1:25000 out of copyright maps
I have been following the availability of the OS 1:25000 maps closely. I am particularly interested in sheets SU77 and SU78, which are identified in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/images/6/62/25kOS_Index_Graphical.pdf as 'Available online now', and in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/images/1/11/25kOS_maps_Held.pdf as 'Tiled' as of 04/02/2010. I use JOSM and can see other sheets in the surrounding area, but not the two I mentioned. Is there some sort of time lag? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] OS 1:25000 out of copyright maps and WMS url
I have been following the progress of the availability of OS 1:25000 out of copyright maps for use with OSM with interest. I can see coverage of Maidenhead, for example, at http://ooc.openstreetmap.org/?zoom=15lat=54.77184lon=-1.57483layers=00B0. I read Andy Robinson's Talk-GB contribution of October 6th where he writes, The first full sheet (NX88 NW or Dumfries [2]) is available for you to try out in JOSM [3]. Just add the URL as a custom WMS.. I copied the url in its entirety (not fully understanding these matters, I readily confess), omitting the quotation marks, and pasted it as a new entry into JOSM's WMS Plugin Preferences. However, after opening up an area of Maidenhead in JOSM and selecting my new OS 1:25000 plugin, I am presented with the red background and Exception occurred note. Clearly I have done something wrong and should appreciate someone's assistance. At the same time, I should be grateful for details of places to find further information relating to this project. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS 1:25000 out of copyright maps and WMS url
Tom, My initial reply wasn't well constructed, obviously. Yes, your url did end with ''. I was trying to say that the WMS message appeared in spite of that, as a piece of advice to others in case they experience the same. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Route planner using UK OSM data
Using the link http://www.gedanken.org.uk/mapping/router/router.html in IE 7, although the details to the left of the map frame are present, I see an empty area - no map. Should I be able to? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[OSM-talk] Multiple .img files from CloudMade
Thanks for pointing me to the OSM download site, Cartinus. Unfortunately, my three attempts to download and save the Europe zipped file have failed. The process reaches about 30%/130Mb after half an hour, downloading at 60 kilobits per second, roughly, before finishing with 'Download Complete', which it isn't. Then the zipped file is seen to be corrupt. Has anyone else had a problem with this, or is it more likely to be my broadband connection/PC? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [Talk-GB] Corporate Cartographers accused of
Richard, I have just read your most recent post. I have emailed a 'Catching up' message to Mary this morning, following reports of her recent address to the Royal Geographical Society. I read with interest your comment, '(who, incidentally, taught me everything I know about cartography :)'. I worked with Mary from the time she came from Pergamon Press to David L. Fryer Company (subsequently GEOProjects Limited) until I left GEOprojects for MapInfo in 1996. They were hard and difficult times economically, but we maintained the highest standards of cartography throughout. I am proud to have been associated with so much good work that we did and the numbers of people in cartography who benefited from our enthusiasm, expertise and demanding standards. I have come full circle. I retired from work about eighteen months ago, but after a career lifetime of doing something I loved, it was difficult to turn my back on it. I commented to Mary this morning, 'I guess it started with buying a GPS receiver last year. That led me into all sorts of fascinating areas, but, most recently, I rediscovered OpenStreetMap. This is a whole world of its own that has enticed me into actively contributing. I find myself now drawing once again Henley-on-Thames plus surrounding area, which I first did nearly forty years ago!'. With best wishes, Bob Hawkins___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Administrative boundaries (UK)
I wonder from where most people obtain their administrative boundaries to digitise for OSM? The most prevalent source is Ordnance Survey, but that current data is copyrighted, of course. I am particularly interested in civil parish boundaries, then in local authority boundaries to build up areas of interest and coverage. Can anyone help? With regards, Bob Hawkins___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-GB] OpenStreetMap street types
Out of interest, I have opened the England.shp.zip file that is in http://download.geofabrik.de/osm/europe/great_britain/, grouped the roads.shp file by Type and ordered it by its count. The result can be seen in the attachment. I suppose, with so many people contributing, one should be quite pleased that,with the exception of 'unsurfaced', all the counts over 1,000 are valid, according to the JOSM Presets drop down, so far as I can determine. I wonder, though: 1. could any cleaning up be done (changing footpath to footway, perhaps) 2. does the presence of so many oddities suggest that the use of Keys and Values needs to be more prominent within the OSM website so that users can more readily understand what is acceptable and what is not? I am a newbie, and I expect experienced users will have more valuable observations and suggestions. I should welcome discussion on this topic. On a final note: I have found it difficult to readily find answers to all the questions that arise as a newcomer. They are often out there somewhere, usually found by Googling and trolling through countless pages. I do feel it would be such a benefit to people like me to have a structered and detailed Help file in one place. Bob Hawkins Street types.csv Description: Binary data ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
