Re: [OSM-talk] Digital environmentalism

[Brad Neuhauser]

Maybe stretching, but what about Google driving cars around constantly to
capture Street View images and road/POI data? Ideally, a lot of OSM data is
gathered by people who are already in the area.

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 1:25 PM Philip Barnes  wrote:

> OSM includes walking and cycling infrastructure thus promoting and
> enabling  sustainable travel options.
>
> Gmaps is primarily a road map.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
> On Tuesday, 25 February 2020, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:
> > There are many reasons to use OSM over Google Maps but
> > "environmentally friendly" seems to not be one of them.
> >
> > One may try some very indirect things, like that Google Maps
> > is primarily a place to display ads, therefore pushing consumerism,
> > therefore environmentally unfriendly but...
> >
> > Maybe "OSM data is reusable, Google maps data is proprietary and
> > other need to recreate it wasting resources" can be argued to
> > be environment-related.
> >
> > Maybe "OSM data can be used for various purposes, including
> > environment protection" can be argued.
> >
> >
> > Feb 25, 2020, 09:28 by ge...@customercarewords.com:
> >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > I will be giving a series of talks this year at An Event Apart (>
> https://aneventapart.com/> ). The talk title is “World Wide Waste,” and
> will examine the impact digital is having on the environment and proposes
> ways digital can be more environmentally friendly. I’d like to propose
> OpenStreetMap as a more environmentally friendly option than Google Maps.
> Can anyone help me with good arguments?
> > >
> > >
> > > Best
> > >
> > >
> > > Gerry
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ***
> > >
> > >
> > > Gerry McGovern +353 87 238 6136 > ge...@customercarewords.com>
>  @gerrymcgovern  www.customercarewords.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my Sailfish device
> ___
> 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: [Talk-us] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Brad Neuhauser]

Minnesota has around 40 cross-county cities, most of which have just a
small portion in the second county. St. Cloud is notable for being in three
counties! https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/137238

On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 9:01 AM Clifford Snow 
wrote:

> Yes - a city can cover more than one county in the US. I'm not familiar
> with your example, but we have Bothell, WA which is in both King and
> Snohomish County.
>
> Best,
> Clifford
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 5:47 AM  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> are there cities (admin level 8) in the USA which  part of two counties?
>>
>> see: https://wambachers-osm.website/images/osm/snaps_2018/lee.png
>>
>> left: Lee County
>>
>> right: DeKalb County
>>
>> there are some more, but i would like to know if that is ok. In Germany
>> this is impossible.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> walter/Germany
>>
>> --
>> My projects:
>>
>> Admin Boundaries of the World 
>> Missing Boundaries
>> 
>> Emergency Map 
>> Postal Code Map (Germany only) 
>> Fools (QA for zipcodes in Germany) 
>> Postcode Boundaries of Germany
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
>
> --
> @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
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] possible upgrade for residential roads in Detroit

[Brad Neuhauser]

Looked at your examples, and an upgrade makes sense to me. If I see roads
like this, I tend to upgrade to a lower level tag (ie tertiary) unless I
understand the road network pretty well. Locals can always bump up the
level later if it seems justified.

Cheers,
Brad (neuhausr)

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 6:11 AM, Ionut Radu - (p) 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I was looking over residential roads in central area of Detroit and I was
> wondering if some of them should be upgraded to a superior function class
> (e.g. tertiary or secondary).
>
> Lots of them are Avenues and Boulevards with at least two lanes and seems
> to be major collector roads.
>
> I think they were imported from TIGER Roads and some of them need a review
> check.
>
>
>
> Some examples:
>
> 2nd Avenue (id: 219713713)
>
> West Palmer Avenue (id: 8738831)
>
>
>
> The counties of interest are: Wayne, Macomb, Oakland.
>
>
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ionut
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Differences with USA admin_level tagging

[Brad Neuhauser]

Frederik's description of colored polygons made me think of the French OSM
instance, which can display admin level, ie
http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=5=39.9597=-78.77311=0B000FFFTFF

Regarding Native American reservations, while there "is no consensus" there
are a couple alternatives to admin_level (using boundary=* instead)
mentioned here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level#Native_American_reservations

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 07/11/2017 08:18 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
> > I'm glad Adam brings up the topic of Gores, as I'm also unclear on how
> such "holes" get "punched into" larger (multi)polygons via tagging.  For
> example, I am "sort-of-sure" (but not positive) that in Vermont, a "gore"
> (or grant, location, purchase, surplus, strip...usually the result of
> "leftovers" from survey errors) get a tag of admin_level=4 to accurately
> reflect that the governmental administration happens via state-level
> bureaucracy.
>
> I think there might be a misunderstanding here and I would like to chip
> in before this gets out of hand, even if I don't have any specialist USA
> knowledge:
>
> If you have an admin_level 4 entity - like a state - then the boundaries
> with admin_level 4 are the outer demarcation of that, i.e. they separate
> the area where the state is responsible from the area where the state is
> not responsible.
>
> The only reason to have an admin level 4 boundary inside a state, would
> be if there was somehow a piece of *federal* territory inside the state.
> Only then would the state have a "hole" in it that would be tagged with
> admin level 4! An area inside the state that is state-governed because
> of a lack of admin_level 5+ entity does not need its own boundary. It is
> defined by the boundaries of the admin_level 5+ entities that surround it.
>
> > without using a multipolygon relation,
>
> You will be using boundary relations which are practically identical to
> multipolygon relations. Any attempt to create a "lower 48 states"
> polygon without relations would hit the 2000 node limit.
>
> > is it correct within OSM to tag, say a very large "lower 48 states"
> polygon with admin_level=2 AND ALSO tag admin_level=2 on, say, a
> national_park inside of it
>
> That would only be correct if the national park was *not* part of the
> lower 48 states but somehow part of another nation.
>
> I'm not 100% sure what you want to achieve but think of it like coloured
> polygons. If you have an admin_level 2 area for the USA, think of that
> as one colour, and then you have a lot of states, each with a different
> colour. In those areas where the "USA colour" shines through, because
> they're not covered by any state, that's automatically federal territory
> and you do *not* want an admin_level 2 boundary surrounding that
> (because then not even the "USA colour" would shine through, there would
> be nothing there).
>
> > Guidance by knowledgable people with real answers might guide us on a
> number of these situations, not just "Gores" (et al) but other kinds of
> "hole" tagging without multipolygons.
>
> If you mean not only "without multipolygons" but "without boundary
> relations" too then I think you should stop right here and leave it to
> people who can work with relations.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Available Building Footprints

[Brad Neuhauser]

I think this is it?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Available_Building_Footprints

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Rihards  wrote:

> On 2017.03.22. 18:37, Clifford Snow wrote:
> > I am happy to announce that Microsoft has made available approximately
> > 9.8 million building footprints including building heights in key
> > metropolitan areas. These footprints are licensed ODbL to allow
> > importing into OSM. These footprints where manually created using high
> > resolution imagery. The data contains no funny field names such as
> > tiger:cfcc or gnis:featureid or fcode=46003, just building height.
> >
> >
> > Please remember to follow the import guidelines.
> >
> > The wiki [1] has more information on these footprints as well as links
> > to download.
>
> the link seems to be a copypaste mistake :)
>
> > [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dieterdreist/diary/40727
> >
> > Enjoy,
> > Clifford Snow
> >
> >
> > --
> > @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
> >
>
>
> --
>  Rihards
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Blue Ridge Parkway

[Brad Neuhauser]

Also see "But is the Blue Ridge Parkway a National Park?" on the Blue Ridge
FAQ: https://www.nps.gov/blri/planyourvisit/np-versus-nf.htm  According to
that it is a "National Park Service area" but not a park.

The NPS makes this distinction on their nomenclature page (
https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/hisnps/NPSHistory/nomenclature.html)

   - "Generally, a *national park* contains a variety of resources and
   encompasses large land or water areas to help provide adequate protection
   of the resources."
   - *"National parkways* encompass ribbons of land flanking roadways and
   offer an opportunity for driving through areas of scenic interest. They are
   not designed for high speed travel. Besides the four areas set aside as
   parkways, other units of the National Park System include parkways within
   their boundaries."


What that means for OSM, of course, may be a whole different
conversation... :)



On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

> According to NPS it is a park.
>
> [1] https://www.nps.gov/maps/full.html?mapId=e212fcb5-4ff9-
> 4787-bbe4-3d40cc0d0daa#9/36.8412/-80.6506
>
> You just can't trust Wikipedia. maybe they should start citing OSM instead
> of those old pesky books.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Frederik Ramm 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I stumbled across the Blue Ridge Parkway in OSM (you learn something
>> new every day, that's one of the things I like so much about OSM).
>>
>> I noticed that Wikipedia has:
>>
>> "The parkway, while not a National Park, has been the most visited unit
>> of the National Park System every year since 1946..."
>>
>> but we have
>>
>> boundary=national_park
>> delivery=no
>> hgv=no
>> leisure=park
>>
>> Is our definition of national park different than Wikipedia's, or should
>> one of the two be changed?
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>> --
>> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
>
>
> --
> @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
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Is USBR 11 in Maryland complete/correct in OSM?

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Kerry Irons 
wrote:

> The NB route uses Keep Tryst Rd. west from the path to connect with US 340
> for about 1,500 ft. headed east and then onto the ramp to SR 67.  The SB
> route takes the right hand ramp from the southern end of SR 67 onto US 340
> for about 500 ft. and then right onto Keep Tryst Rd. and then onto the
> path.  The route uses the towpath, not Sandy Hook Rd.
>
>
>
So, where they split, it looks like the NB route isn't tagged at all, just
the SB route.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Per-State relations for the Appalachian Trail

[Brad Neuhauser]

What about just combining the relations for selected states where the AT
crosses back and forth across the state border, like TN/NC and VA/WV?

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

>
> > On May 2, 2016, at 9:49 AM, Mike N  wrote:
> >
> > On 5/2/2016 11:41 AM, Elliott Plack wrote:
> >> This got me thinking, is there any specific need to have the route
> >> broken up by state? Unlike interstate highways, where maintenance
> >> changes across state lines, at the border, the AT maintenance is handled
> >> by a trifecta of federal agencies and a non-profit. There are also 31
> >> clubs that share some of the maintenance on some sections.
> >
> >  The advantage of breaking up a relation into smaller relations is to
> minimize the probability of edit conflicts.  I don't know how often things
> change, or more detail is added on the Appalachian Trail.   My tendency
> would be to leave it separated, but I have no strong opinion either way.
>
> I am with Mike here. The state boundary offers an obvious and visible
> opportunity to slice up potentially unwieldy relations into smaller chunks.
> Huge relations make editing trickier (conflicts, relation member
> management, loading times) and data processing potentially more time and
> memory consuming.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Someone please check Beaver Lake, AR

[Brad Neuhauser]

I'm guessing that's the issue--all the tags should be on the relation
(once), not duplicated on the individual outer ways that make up the
relation.

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Mike Henson  wrote:

> I noticed Beaver Lake AR is no longer showing up as a lake on the map.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4051041
>
> I am not sure if this is a mapping for the render or the render needs to
> change. This may have changed when the render changed the trunk colors from
> blue to red/pink. The Beaver Lake relation has not been modified in over a
> year.
>
> Can someone with more experience then me look into this? If I was
> correcting this, I would add all the beaver lake information to the
> multipolygon relation.
>
> Mike
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Cycle_greenway

[Brad Neuhauser]

All occurrences of cycleway=cycle_greenway seem to be in Seattle as of now:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/bI5

There are at least a few different accounts adding that tag, but STBrenden
included the greenway tag in some changeset comments (ie
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/21347401).  Have you tried a
changeset comment or direct message to anyone?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Natfoot  wrote:

> Hello to the US community,
>
> I have found some edits in the Seattle area that have cycleway:
> cycle_greenway
> I can find no reference to this tag within the wiki.   Can someone please
> advise on the credibility of this tag. Also comment if someone is using
> this tag in a rendering or other application.
>
> Portland another city with an extensive greenway network is tagging their
> greenways the more traditional tagging attributes:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/45.55605/-122.64238
> Though most naming says they are bike boulevards.
>
> Resources:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_tags_map
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway
>
> Tag Used:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/21347318
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/21347240
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/332086469
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6413359
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6384419
> http://api.osm.org/way/262778845/history
> http://spike-03.osm.ichosted.org.uk/way/6515083/history
>
> http://spike-03.osm.ichosted.org.uk/way/6507939/history#map=16/47.5732/-122.3051
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Nathan P
> email: natf...@gmail.com
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Max abonneme...@revolwear.com wrote:

 so here is a concrete example:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/41.7971/-88.3293

 there is a hole in the abandoned railway, which orgiginally was probably
 going through. How would you map this?
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

You could keep the way there, and tag it railway=razed. That's kind of a
compromise, as the data is still there, but should pretty much only render
on OpenRailwayMap. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads

[Brad Neuhauser]

 How do I know if there is a razed railway there?

 That is, if I'm on the ground and there's a building, how do I know it's a
 razed railway?

 - Serge


Personally, I haven't used that tag much, I'm not that into railways. :)
When I have, it's usually when I'm doing some remote mapping in the US,
there's an imported railway from TIGER which I can see aligns with track
remnants in two spots (often already tagged railway=abandoned), but in
between there is new development which has totally removed the tracks and
regraded the land for housing, highway, mall, etc.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] Question?

[Brad Neuhauser]

I think there's also this?  http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/303225395

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:

 On 6/29/15 3:58 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
  Is there any feature on the ground that can be surveyed? From the
  image it doesn't appear that the site has any historical markers that
  can be mapped. If so, I would say it doesn't belong in OSM.  You'l'
  have to ask OHM if they think it belongs there.
 
  You should also contact the editor. I'm sure she would be happy to
  explain why she felt it belongs in OSM.
 
  Clifford
 
  On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Hans De Kryger
  hans.dekryge...@gmail.com mailto:hans.dekryge...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Would this be better in OpenHistoricalMap?
 
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/33.44692/-112.09043
 
 

 the canal, you mean?

 it's probably appropriate for OHM, although i'd be interested in what is
 actually
 surveyable on the ground. the existence of something surveyable
 determines if
 anything should be in OSM in, perhaps, the disused: namespace.

 it were to go into OHM, of course, we like it if it's documented and
 start_date
 and end_date tags are provided. but then we'd prefer the whole canal
 system,
 or at least major chunks of it, instead of this fragment.

 so the answer is definitely maybe.

 richard

 --
 rwe...@averillpark.net
  Averill Park Networking - GIS  IT Consulting
  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
  Java - Web Applications - Search



 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Proper tagging for crosswalks

[Brad Neuhauser]

Small detail, but if it's a bike trail, bicycle=designated is probably
better than bicycle=yes

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Bicycle_Restrictions

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote:

 Paul, Bryan,

 Thanks for your help with this! My issue was with bicycle trails that
 cross roads, as they usually put a crosswalk in for these cases, but the
 route itself can support other non-motorized vehicles. I think this gives
 me some good options that would be acceptable.

 1) I could use highway=footway, footway=crossing, bicycle=yes -- which is
 a little misleading, but could make sense

 2) I could also use highway=path, crossing=yes, bicycle=yes -- this seems
 better to me, but I don't know if it's acceptable to use crossing without
 connecting it to a value


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

Re: [Talk-us] Paved Shoulder Tag for US Highways

[Brad Neuhauser]

cycleway=shoulder is used in the US too: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9IE
That seems to more accurately describe the situation, so I'd suggest using
that tag.

I wouldn't use cycleway=lane since I'd expect that to be marked as such.

(basically +1 to Richard's follow up post on the forum
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=506940#p506940 )

On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Larry-CalRoadRunner calroadrun...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Hello Everyone,

 The following link is a discussion I am having on the Development Forum on
 OSM.
 Rather then going into a long explanation, it was suggested that a
 solution can be found here, I have provided the direct link to the
 discussion.

 http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=31206

 Please respond to this request with a proper solution to this dilemma.
 I know that every bicycle rider in the USA will be very happy, if a
 solution can be found that everyone can agree on.

 Larry
 California RoadRunner

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP

[Brad Neuhauser]

Just to reinforce what has already been said, here's what the Census thinks
of CDPs:

Census Designated Places (CDPs) are the statistical counterparts of
 incorporated places, and are* delineated to provide data for settled
 concentrations of population that are identifiable by name but are not
 legally incorporated* under the laws of the state in which they are
 located.   The boundaries usually are defined in cooperation with local or
 tribal officials and generally updated prior to each decennial census.   
 *These
 boundaries, which usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of
 an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity boundary, have no
 legal status, nor do these places have officials elected to serve
 traditional municipal functions*.   CDP boundaries may change from one
 decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern; a CDP
 with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the
 same boundary.   CDPs must be contained within a single state and may not
 extend into an incorporated place.   There are no population size
 requirements for CDPs.


https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtc_place.html

Actual local administrative entities tend to be Places and sometimes County
Subdivisions, but it really varies by state. If you want to dig that deep,
you can view info about each state's census geography here:
https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/geoguide.html

Brad

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:

 I agree with Rich Welty- if you know the area and the CDP boundary
 makes no sense, then remove it.

 The issue in the past has been where some people wanted to remove all of
 them.

 - Serge

 On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us
 wrote:
  I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level  8 since it does
 not
  exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years
  apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node.
 There
  doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most
  likely be annex by Lake Stevens.
 
  Before I do I'd like to hear people opinion about deleting these
  admin_level=8 for CDP boundaries.
 
  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
 

 ___
 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

Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Mapping high tension power lines in Nepal

[Brad Neuhauser]

Francois, I'm aware of all that, I was just mentioning that unusual tag
because it was relevant in the current context. GautamPratik has not made
any changesets since the earthquake (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/GautamPratik/history), but maybe you
could send a message so if they do have a chance to get back to mapping
hydropower in the future, you could help them to use better tagging.
Cheers, Brad

On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 5:26 AM, François Lacombe fl.infosrese...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Hi,

 The power generation model was refined in 2013 and include some
 distinction between a power plant and a power generator.
 It would be convenient and sustainable to take care of this for this
 concern.

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_generation_refinement

 Power generator only regard any kind of device which convert energy from
 one sort to another. It should be mapped with power=generator
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dgenerator

 Power plant is the whole site and can be mapped with an area or a relation
 if the power plant isn't enclosed with a fence (which is often the case for
 hydro power plant).
 power=plant is the tag currently approved.
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dplant


 The hydropower_project tag may be redundant with power=plant.
 Currently, it may be useful to map power=plant sites features only.
 Generators are supplementary information only used by specialized mappers.

 It would be great to don't use any other custom power=* value to allow the
 largest amount of mapper to work with these datas.

 I'll add some in my spare time.

 All the best


 *François Lacombe*

 fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
 www.infos-reseaux.com
 @InfosReseaux http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux

 2015-05-14 17:23 GMT+02:00 Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com:

 Fyi, user GautamPratik already started entering some hydro sites using
 the tag hydropower_project:name. Here's a search for that:
 http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lJ

 And one for power=generator generally in Nepal:
 http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lN

 Cheers, Brad

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Steve Bower sbo...@gmavt.net wrote:

 The Nepal Electric Authority would likely already have such a map, or
 relevant data:
 http://www.nea.org.np/

 Page 106 of their annual plan has a transmission line map:
 http://www.nea.org.np/images/supportive_docs/Annual%20Report-2014.pdf

 I did not find anything better in a quick search of their web site, but
 they could probably provide something.

 Steve


 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton j...@arkemie.com
 wrote:

 Hi,

 As you may know, helicopters play a critical role in bringing help to
 Nepalese people affected by April 25 7.8 earthquake, and May 12 7.4
 aftershock, with roads blocked or made dangerous by landslides and
 unstable terrain.

 A USMC helicopter that was taking part in this effort is missing since
 May 12. Other helicopters involved in the search and rescue mission
 report that: A primary concern for ongoing search and rescue efforts is
 unmarked high tension power lines, which have been reported and bisect
 many of the valleys in the search area.

 Some high tension power lines have already been mapped
 (http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lx , passed along to those conducting the
 searches). Starting from electrical dams makes it easier to spot them.

 If mappers experienced at mapping power lines could give a hand, this
 would be great. (Or others willing to learn, like me :) ).

 Bing is available for large parts of Nepal. A focus for current search
 and rescue effort is around Ghorthali (27.7517 N  86.0342 E) from where
 a Nepalese local reported seeing a helicopter crash. But of course high
 tension power lines would also be nice to have for Sindhupalchowk,
 Dolakha and other affected districts (see
 http://kathmandulivinglabs.github.io/quake-maps/).

 (Please download and upload OSM data often, in case other mappers work
 on the same theme).

 Thanks,

 Jean-Guilhem


 ___
 HOT mailing list
 h...@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot



 ___
 HOT mailing list
 h...@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot



 ___
 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] [HOT] Mapping high tension power lines in Nepal

[Brad Neuhauser]

Fyi, user GautamPratik already started entering some hydro sites using the
tag hydropower_project:name. Here's a search for that:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lJ

And one for power=generator generally in Nepal:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lN

Cheers, Brad

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Steve Bower sbo...@gmavt.net wrote:

 The Nepal Electric Authority would likely already have such a map, or
 relevant data:
 http://www.nea.org.np/

 Page 106 of their annual plan has a transmission line map:
 http://www.nea.org.np/images/supportive_docs/Annual%20Report-2014.pdf

 I did not find anything better in a quick search of their web site, but
 they could probably provide something.

 Steve


 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton j...@arkemie.com
 wrote:

 Hi,

 As you may know, helicopters play a critical role in bringing help to
 Nepalese people affected by April 25 7.8 earthquake, and May 12 7.4
 aftershock, with roads blocked or made dangerous by landslides and
 unstable terrain.

 A USMC helicopter that was taking part in this effort is missing since
 May 12. Other helicopters involved in the search and rescue mission
 report that: A primary concern for ongoing search and rescue efforts is
 unmarked high tension power lines, which have been reported and bisect
 many of the valleys in the search area.

 Some high tension power lines have already been mapped
 (http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lx , passed along to those conducting the
 searches). Starting from electrical dams makes it easier to spot them.

 If mappers experienced at mapping power lines could give a hand, this
 would be great. (Or others willing to learn, like me :) ).

 Bing is available for large parts of Nepal. A focus for current search
 and rescue effort is around Ghorthali (27.7517 N  86.0342 E) from where
 a Nepalese local reported seeing a helicopter crash. But of course high
 tension power lines would also be nice to have for Sindhupalchowk,
 Dolakha and other affected districts (see
 http://kathmandulivinglabs.github.io/quake-maps/).

 (Please download and upload OSM data often, in case other mappers work
 on the same theme).

 Thanks,

 Jean-Guilhem


 ___
 HOT mailing list
 h...@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot



 ___
 HOT mailing list
 h...@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


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

Re: [Talk-us] Moving historic railroad ways from OSM to OpenHistoricalMap

[Brad Neuhauser]

I understand keeping a feature in OSM if there is a remnant of the
railroad, but there are areas where everything has been replatted, regraded
and redeveloped, yet there is still a razed feature in OSM (for one small
example, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?#map=16/38.8663/-94.7943).
This seems like a good candidate for moving out of OSM to OHM.

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:

  On 4/1/15 3:14 AM, Mike Dupont wrote:

 Here in Kansas we have very many abandoned railways (and many pickup
 trucks to replace them) that are turned into trails or paved over and still
 visible. I would say if there is any sign of them left to keep the
 information in some way.

  this is a circumstance for which i think we need to talk things out.

 given that OHM exists and works, the situation has evolved a
 bit. i know that when i'm looking at inactive race facilities, there's
 a very grey area when it comes to putting them in OHM vs OSM,
 and i've not been as consistent as i should be about it, in large
 part because i'm uncertain about where the dividing line really
 should be, and to what extent i should take non-spatial data
 into account.

 richard

 -- rwe...@averillpark.net
  Averill Park Networking - GIS  IT Consulting
  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
  Java - Web Applications - Search


 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)

[Brad Neuhauser]

Speaking of rail mapping: I noticed something that could use some
attention. The key old_railway_operator=* is used ~90K times, but almost
entirely in the US. [1] It has a *really* minimal wiki page. [2] And I
don't see it mentioned on the main Railways page [3] or the US Railways
project page [4]. (though I did see it on the California Railroads page you
linked to)

At minimum, I'm thinking some additional documentation would be good. Also
wondering if the US OSM rail community is doing things differently from the
rest of the world? Or maybe the rest of the world is  still using their
railroads! :) Thanks, Brad

[1] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/old_railway_operator
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aold_railway_operator
[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railways
[4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/Railways

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:56 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:

 http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads now documents an early
 alpha state of OSM rail in California.

 Especially if you are a railfan in California, please have a look. Or,
 if you are a rail enthusiast in another state, and want a template with
 which to jump-start better OSM rail completion in your neck of the woods,
 please copy what you might from this wiki.  It is a little bit stubby
 (some missing elements in the tables...) but it should provide a good
 launch pad for either a California railfan or an OSM mapper who wants to
 ignite a similar venture in another state.

 As is true of so many things OSM:  there remains much more to do, but look
 what we've already done!

 http://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=enlat=37lon=-96zoom=
 5style=standard

 Regards and happy mapping (whether rail or another sort),

 SteveA
 California

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's

[Brad Neuhauser]

  I punted.  When Josm added a preset that included addr:flats, then I
  started using that tag.  Right or wrong I figured most of the other
  tags are Euro-English coloured, so to speak, that it did not mater if
  I used addr:flats verses addr:unit.
 __

 addr:flats works if you are talking about flats, but doesn't fit other
 scenarios, such as suites in an office building.

 addr:flats is for a range of unit numbers. That's how it's described in
the wiki, and you can see that is indeed the main usage if you look at
taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=addr%3Aflats
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:23 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:

 On 2/4/2015 11:25 PM, Greg Morgan wrote:

   addr:housenumber contains both the number
 and the building letter in the same field.  The map is useful because
 you can find the building. How have other people tried to handle these
 situations?


 I haven't tried in any meaningful way.  It's too early to guess how an
 address matching utility might work.   Until now I have used both

  addr:housenumber=724D

 and
  addr:housenumber=724 + addr:unit=D

  depending on whether the address specified by the owner's web site
 included the letter.   More recently, I've gravitated towards separating
 the addr:unit even if the owner specified it as one word, but I'm not sure
 it's the most useful.   The addr:housenumber doesn't render anyway if the
 building has also been tagged as another POI that renders.

 Including a unit number in the house number is incorrect and potentially
confusing. There are house numbers that have a prefix or suffix as part of
the house number, that's a different thing. It just depends on how the
building is addressed.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[OSM-talk] maintenance?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Looks like there's some database maintenance happening--I didn't notice
anything about this on the list recently. Any idea what's up and how long
it might last? (was planning a small mapping party this afternoon...)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Who controls data: Google Maps, others erasing Hollywood sign, but it's in OSM

[Brad Neuhauser]

Could you include the new node in the relation as role=label? That's at
least somewhat documented...

On Thursday, November 27, 2014, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:


 2014-11-26 18:30 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wiseman awise...@gmail.com
 javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','awise...@gmail.com');:

 That was me -- but I would argue it's an unusual way to tag it -- it's
 not the individual letters that are important, it's the whole piece.



 yes, that is clear, and the data in OSM also reflected this by having a
 site relation to group all the letters into the actual monument. That
 relation is the object to put the name, wikipedia link, tourism=attraction
 tag etc. (and they are all there).



 You wouldn't tag each president in Mount Rushmore and leave it at that,
 right?



 I wouldn't leave it as that, but I also wouldn't tag them singularly and
 then add another node for the whole, I'd rather try to combine the
 individual presidents into a whole piece of artwork by using a relation.


 cheers,
 Martin



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

[Talk-us] admin level for US states

[Brad Neuhauser]

I can't speak to the other countries you mention, but Japan's prefectures
are the equivalent of US states, and both are admin_level 4. The
Japanese states (doshusei) listed for admin_level 3 on the wiki page seem
to be some sort of experiment in regional administration. More info in
English here:
http://www.mutantfrog.com/2010/12/03/the-new-kansai-regional-league/

On Wednesday, November 26, 2014, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:


 2014-11-25 10:59 GMT+01:00 Sarah Hoffmann lon...@denofr.de:

 admin_levels have been invented in order that different borders can be
 rendered consistently among countries according to the wiki[1].



 +1, that's also what I am after.



 That's
 also what I remember. State eqivalent doesn't mean that they must be
 organised exactly in the same way but that they are roughly at the same
 level of administrative hierarchies.



 +1
 my point was, that they aren't. Italian regions aren't roughly at the same
 level of administrative hierarchy than are the US States, and I guess also
 the French regions aren't.
 Japan does have states on admin level 3.



 Under that definition US states are
 the same as German bundesländer, French regions, Canadian provinces etc.
 even though their political influence and internal organzisation is
 wildly different.



 how could you compare hierarchical levels if the organization is wildly
 different?




 There is a lot of software around that works under the assumption that
 US states (and the equivalents in other countries) can be found at
 admin_level=4.



 and this would break if level 3 was used?



 The current admin level hierarchy is not perfect but
 it works for most practical applications.



 actually it seems that changing the rendering to administrative polygons
 rather than using place nodes will create/reveal some inconsistencies and I
 was trying to fix this / find a solution. Maybe you are right and the
 solution is not in modifying the US state admin level but changing
 elsewhere. It simply seemed kind of an inconsistency to have the US state
 at the same level as German Länder and French Region, but maybe that was a
 misinterpretation of the admin levels.

 cheers,
 Martin

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

Re: [Talk-us] admin level for US states

[Brad Neuhauser]

Here is the most recent thread on the tagging list about Indian
reservations:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-November/020160.html

Neither of the proposals mentioned in the thread advocates using admin_level

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:

 On 11/25/14 5:24 AM, Minh Nguyen wrote:


 Incidentally, [1] is silent on the question of Indian reservations, a
 topic that has come up periodically on this list. Is there any consensus on
 how to tag them? If so, it should be reflected in the table.

 i'm not aware of any consensus beyond indian reservations are hard.
 they do not fit naturally into the admin_level hierarchy.

 richard

 --
 rwe...@averillpark.net
  Averill Park Networking - GIS  IT Consulting
  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
  Java - Web Applications - Search


 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] admin level for US states

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Jack Burke burke...@gmail.com wrote:

 I would point out that the legal status of U.S. States is slightly
 different than that of provinces (and likely of states in other countries).
 For one thing, U.S. States exist in their own right and do not drive their
 existence from a higher government (even though most of them were created
 by a higher government). German States and perhaps Swiss cantons might have
 the same status.

 -jack


 ...and German states and Swiss cantons are admin_level=4 according to the
previously-linked page. I'd also note that page says admin_level was
introduced in order that different borders can be rendered consistently
among countries. That is, it's a worldwide rendering aid, not trying to
make profound statements about legal minutiae.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Second thoughts

[Brad Neuhauser]

It's in pretty wide use (35K uses), so I created a page in the wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:unsigned_ref

But I don't really know the details of usage or best practice, so I hope
others can fix and add to what's there...

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Jack Burke burke...@gmail.com wrote:

 OSM has the tag unsigned_ref to handle exactly this situation. There just
 isn't a wiki page describing it.

 -jack



 On October 13, 2014 3:45:22 PM EDT, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 US 52 FOLLOWS I 94 to me means they are concurrent, even if Minnesota
 only has signs for I94 instead of I94/US52
 So it is a matter of presentation, not facts.

 Here in Florida there are places where most signs list only one name, but
 periodically there will be references to other names sharing the same
 route.

 Dale

 Dale Puch

 On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Tom Fistere tbfist...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello!  My name is Tom Fistere and I go by CountryLoon on OSM.  After
 about a week of editing I thought I should throw out a couple of questions
 and comments of what I am doing so far...

 I have started looking at the road typing throughout the state of
 Minnesota as it gives me an opportunity to study the status of the map
 statewide.  I see areas that are well documented and drawn and then there
 are areas so neglected that the lines and imagery are needed some immediate
 help.  I invite anyone to check out my editing job on the segment of MN 23
 between St Cloud and Foley, MN as it was rebuilt to an expressway in 2013
 and let me know how I did.

 A couple of questions, Minnesota hates concurrent highways.  US 52 is
 concurrent with I 94 from St Paul, MN to Fargo, ND according to AASHTO but
 MNDoT refuses to sign the routing beyond US 52 FOLLOWS I 94 sign at the
 interchange in St Paul.  A similar thing occurs with US 12 through the Twin
 Cities to the Wisconsin line.  Should the map reflect the concurrency or
 not?  Google chose to do it but since it is unsigned, I lean toward not
 showing it.

 Most of my information is coming from county GIS sites and DOT, are
 there other other sites I should be checking into when looking for
 information verification?  So far my interest is in the road network but I
 am willing to branch off into recreational trails and such in the future.

 Thanks!
 Tom

 ___
 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


 --
 Typos courtesy of fancy auto-spell technology.

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] User going around adding '-' to ref tags in Michigan

[Brad Neuhauser]

This has probably come up in the past, but Michigan's state highways are
signed and referred to as M ##
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Michigan_Highways

It's also mentioned on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Michigan/Highway_Relations, which
differentiates between the network abbreviations and way refs

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:

 Also sounds like M-3, M-10, etc should probably be tagged MI 3, MI 10...

 On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:11 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com
 wrote:

  Just thought I'd give you guys a heads up, but there is a user going
 around and adding '-' to all the ref tags he modifies in Michigan.

 A good example would be a good chunk of I-75 [1], I-96, M-3, M-10 in
 Metro Detroit.  But he's done it elsewhere in Michigan.

 I sent him a PM earlier mentioning this as a 'FYI' that we don't add the
 '-' to the ref tags.  Hopefully he'll respond.  Otherwise, this might be a
 massive cleanup.  Anybody else want to try and get a hold of this user as
 well?  I have also noticed that in some places where he has 'tweaked' the
 ref tags, others have done some 'reverting' work already putting them back
 to the normal standard. [2]

 -James

 [1] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8767860/history
 [2] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17729896/history


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

Re: [Talk-us] Merging NYC buildings

[Brad Neuhauser]

The thing is, once it's in OSM, it's not NYC's data anymore--it's
everyone's data. So it's no longer authoritative. Sometimes the crowd
will improve it or add to it, sometimes the crowd will screw it up,
sometimes the crowd will do it differently than you think is best. The
theory (borne out in practice thus far) is that over time the data quality
line keeps trending upwards.

Best,
Brad

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Reilly, Colin crei...@doitt.nyc.gov
wrote:

  All that a particular data source can be authoritative for is what that
 data source says something is. What is authoritative for OSM is the ground
 truth.

 Not sure I understand the first sentence. As for the second, your eyes can
 deceive you. Nonetheless, I would argue that authoritative data should
 matter and could be tagged as source= authoritative. Intent not to prevent
 other from updating but more as a cautionary flag.  To me accuracy and
 currency should be paramount.

  This seems incorrect. If I build a structure on two tax parcels, it can
 exist as a single building. It may not be legal, or may require planning
 tricks that make it two buildings in the eyes of the city, but if I survey
 it and it's one building, I will map it so.

 Not in NYC. Although there are some edge and legacy cases, you cannot
 legally build a building that straddles more than one parcel. You would
 first need to merge the tax parcels before constructing the building.

  Yah, if that were true it would be a very strange and site-specific
 rule. I know of several buildings here that span multiple tax lots.

 NYC specific. I was not speaking in general terms but to NYC
 building/finance codes. Without that requirement, code enforcement and tax
 assessment would be difficult.


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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER 2014 update

[Brad Neuhauser]

 you will need to figure out your state's FIPS code to figure out the
 state files of interest.

 You'll probably also want to find out the county FIPS code, so you can get
the data for a particular area of interest--statewide files can get a
little large! You can find the state and county codes through this Census
webpage: http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/codes/cou.html

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:

  On 9/17/14 12:57 AM, Nick Hocking wrote:

 Richard Welty wrote the question is how much work are you willing to do
 to use it.

  here is how much work is involved:

 1) find the shape file that covers your area on the TIGER site:

 ftp://ftp2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2014/ROADS/

 you will need to figure out your state's FIPS code to figure out the
 state files of interest.

 2) install the JOSM plugin for loading shapefiles (i believe
 that the opendata plug in does this, it's been a while since
 i installed it.)

 3) learn to manage the layers stuff well enough to move things
 from one layer to another.

 richard
 -- rwe...@averillpark.net
  Averill Park Networking - GIS  IT Consulting
  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
  Java - Web Applications - Search


 ___
 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

Re: [OSM-talk] problems I cant fix

[Brad Neuhauser]

Screen full of red is not what you want to see on the OSM Inspector's
Multipolygon checker! :(

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=multipolygonlon=-89.73150lat=29.64420zoom=10opacity=0.91overlays=invalid_geometry_hull,duplicate_ways,intersections,intersection_lines,ring_not_closed_hull,ring_not_closed,unconnected_end_nodes,touching_inner_rings_hull,touching_inner_rings,role_mismatch_hull,role_mismatch,duplicate_tags_hull,duplicate_tags,multipolygons_type_is_boundary,type_is_boundary,ways,role_markers,way_end_nodes,way_nodes

On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote:

 On 2014-09-07 18:59, David Jenne wrote:

  I find it works best if a river’s edges are closed polygons and
 tagged as a areas (i.e. “riverbank”) instead of lines.  A
 riverbank can then assigned to a multipolygon using the “outer”
 role.  If using the ID editor to convert lines to areas, you may have
 to type the new tag into a slot under “All Tags”.  Any islands can
 be tagged as an “area” and assigned the “inner” role for the
 corresponding riverbank outer polygon.  To avoid exceeding the 2000
 node upload limit, several abutting multi-polygons may be needed along
 the length of a river.


 What I also see a lot is that an inner way of a multipolygon is untagged
 and has a second way overlapping it on all nodes which is then tagged with
 the landuse of that island. This is uncessecary. The renderer is smart
 enough that you can tag inner ways with the proper landuse.
 And if 2 ways overlapping is bad enough, I've seen up to 6 ways
 overlapping!

 The number of items I'm deleting while cleaning this up is massive.

 Regards,
 Maarten

  FROM: wouter van der plas [mailto:wouterv.dp...@gmail.com]
 SENT: Saturday, September 06, 2014 10:22 AM
 TO: talk@openstreetmap.org
 SUBJECT: [OSM-talk] problems I cant fix

 hallo,

 I was working in the area of new orleans. and i came to this area:

 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/30.2417/-89.8358 [2]

 and i was missing some rivers that were taged but were not showing up
 on the map.

 so i found out that there was a broken link in the multie polygon.

 i tried to fix it but when went up and down the river there were more
 and more problems.

 and i tried fixing them all but i just dont have the knolage.

 so i hope that sombody else can fix them. and that this is the right
 way to handel this problem.

 thanks in advance,

 wouter (wvdp)

 Links:
 --
 [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/45.9323/-111.4986
 [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/30.2417/-89.8358

 ___
 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: [Talk-us] Taxiways and runways in mapnik?

[Brad Neuhauser]

From osm-talk:

On 7 September 2014 13:51, Gorm E. Johnsen osml...@gorm.cc wrote:
 Any changes to runways and taxiways?
 These seem to have an issue at the moment. Hard to tell at a glance due to
 cached tiles and rendering ques.
 But at least they were not rendered at zoom 15 at one recent point in
time.

There is indeed an issue with aeroways, which are currently not
rendered when tagged as ways:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/927

A solution has already been written, but it hasn't been accepted yet:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/928

We hope to roll out the solution as soon as possible.

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:30 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:

 What happened to taxiways (and runways?) in mapnik recently?  Take a look
 at any airport with taxiways near you and see if it isn't re-rendering in a
 oops, something is missing kind of way.

 SteveA
 California

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] routing tags used by actual routing applications

[Brad Neuhauser]

Just trying to process this: wouldn't a tracktype 1 be tagged as
unclassified or residential anyway?  Or to ask a different way, assuming
that roads with houses should be tagged as residential, when should one tag
a sub-tertiary road as track vs. using unclassified?


On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:


 On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:

 For tracks, tracktype indicates condition, and tracktype1 should be
 drivable by any family sedan as it may even be paved.


 This.

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] routing tags used by actual routing applications

[Brad Neuhauser]

I think highway=service could be public or private, just a matter of if it
is used to access a certain building / facility like Martin said. Some
public examples could be road to a public parking lot, driveway in/out of
fire station, road leading to a public works facility.


On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Kevin Broderick k...@kevinbroderick.com
wrote:

 Highway=service implies a private road, though; if a public road dead-ends
 at a single building or facility, it should be =residential or
 =unclassified, right?

 The tracktype= key is also not really applicable to many of the
 unmaintained roads around here, at least as described on the wiki. The
 description implies that a track is a continuum from a maintained roadway
 to a virtually invisible path across a field. The unmaintained roads in
 this part of the country are usually old roadways that were established
 before modern engineering standards; many of them go up and down the fall
 line and have waterbars, washouts, rock ledges, or all of the above. For
 example:


 https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t31.0-8/1267970_716253801218_1989759584_o.jpg

 https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t31.0-8/1266483_716253736348_406630391_o.jpg

 https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t31.0-8/1264969_716254075668_897288595_o.jpg

 https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t31.0-8/10317804_767096626788_7562385056086790114_o.jpg

 All of these photos are unmaintained roads in Vermont. The last one is
 probably reasonable for a high-clearance, AWD car (e.g. Subaru) in the
 hands of a competent driver, and definitely should be passable by a skilled
 driver in a 4x4 pickup or Jeep. The other three would probably require a
 modified 4x4 and the right skillset. They are also legal right-of-ways, so
 clearly access=yes for all vehicle types (even though I wouldn't want to
 get routed down one of those unknowingly).

 I've been using the smoothness key to provide additional data on such
 tracks, which I realize is a universally agreed solution, but it's the best
 one I've found to date; I'd be open to further suggestions.


 On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer 
 dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:


 2014-07-03 17:36 GMT+02:00 Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com:

 Just trying to process this: wouldn't a tracktype 1 be tagged as
 unclassified or residential anyway?  Or to ask a different way, assuming
 that roads with houses should be tagged as residential, when should one tag
 a sub-tertiary road as track vs. using unclassified?



 You'd always tag it as unclassified, unless it is not a connection road
 and is used only for agricultural / forestry purposes. If it is not a
 connection road but used to access a certain building / facility, use
 service.

 E.g. this is clearly a track: http://binged.it/1odgrTZ
 or this: http://binged.it/1j0zEud

 in case of doubt I'd put unclassified ;-)

 cheers,
 Martin

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




 --
 Kevin Broderick
 k...@kevinbroderick.com

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Creating a multipolygon of a body of water across state boundaries

[Brad Neuhauser]

It's one body of water, so I would create one multipolygon for the whole
reservoir. Data providers should be able to deal with things crossing
administrative boundaries, it happens with all sorts of objects.

Note that the user who did this made chunks of areas over the water--maybe
to avoid the 2000 node limit, and/or to avoid creating a multipolygon. I
did some of that five years ago, too ;). It would be pretty easy to convert
to one multipolygon, though: cut the area ways where they join, add the
shore portions to the multipolygon as outer ways, and delete the ways that
cross the water. Make sure all the outer ways join each other--a small gap
could cause rendering issues. All tags should be on the multipolygon and
none on the outer ways.

Then islands can be added as inner members of the multipolygon. In
addition, islands can be tagged place=island, especially if they have a
name. Sometimes I also see them tagged with landcover (ie natural=forest,
etc)

Cheers,
Brad


On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Will Skora skorasau...@gmail.com wrote:

 I noticed that some islands within Pymatuning Reservoir
 ttps://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/41.6074/-80.5203 , a large reservoir
 that
 cuts across the Ohio and Pennsylvania borders for 8 miles, weren't
 visible on the main map layer and was going to trace them.

 The islands were tagged natural=land, what I recall was an outdated
 tagging scheme. The water is consists of multiple adjacent closed ways
 tagged 'natural=water'

 I wasn't sure whether natural=coastline was the correct current
 tagging for them, so I checked the wiki page and noticed that for
 waterways and bodies of water (that aren't the ocean), to use a
 multipolygon relation with tagging the islands as 'inner'

 My hunch is that if I create the multipolygon relation across multiple
 states, some state extracts [OHIO, PA] may not contain any of the
 reservoir if I were to create one multipolygon relation for all of the
 Reservoir. Is this correct?

 What's the recommended course of action to satisfy consumers of OSM
 data and mappers?

 Regards,
 Will

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths

[Brad Neuhauser]

Just to clarify, Martijn, are you saying example #1 is physically separate
because there's a curb *and* a grassy median in between the street and
sidewalk, but example #2 is not physically separate because there's only a
curb in between?  As a pedestrian, I would hope that a curb would be
physically separate enough :)  Brad


On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Martijn van Exel mart...@openstreetmap.us
 wrote:

 I do that too - but only when the sidewalk is really physically separate
 from the main roadway.

 So I would add a separate highway=footway here: http://binged.it/1fttMse
 But not here: http://binged.it/1heqqnR

 Generally - don't map for the renderer. If there is a clear use case and
 the data conforms with general guidelines for inclusion in the map I would
 suggest, yea, get over it :)

 Martijn


 On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:38 AM, William Morris 
 wboyk...@geosprocket.comwrote:

 Is there a general OSM policy on marking sidewalks as highway=footway?
 User dolphinling appears to have gone crazy in downtown Burlington,VT
 tracing the sidewalks and calling them footways. Which wouldn't be a
 problem if footways weren't so cartographically distinct in everyone's
 stylesheets:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/44.47772/-73.21112

 Should I:

 1. Revert
 2. Get in touch with the editor
 3. Get over it

 Thanks!

 -Bill Morris
 @vtcraghead


 --
 William Morris | Cartographer
 (802)-870-0880 | geosprocket.io | GeoSprocket LLC, Burlington VT

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




 --
 Martijn van Exel
 President, US Chapter
 OpenStreetMap
 http://openstreetmap.us/
 http://osm.org/

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Burning Man old data, publicity opportunity

[Brad Neuhauser]

You might want to check out this thread from last year:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2013-August/011641.html

Cheers, Brad


On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:16 PM, robmorgan78 robmorga...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello everyone, I am doing a project in my GIS class that involves working
 with a shape file and exporting to a KML file. I have been going to Burning
 Man for the past few years now and thought it would be interesting to work
 with data from BM. I stumbled across this discussion and now instead of one
 question I have two...

 First question, does anyone know where I can get shapefile data from past
 Burning Man events?

 My second question is, I am going to Burning Man this year (2014) and would
 be very interested in helping OSM with data collection. Who and what would
 I
 need to do to get involved in helping OSM with data collection at Burning
 Man 2014?

 -Robert



 --
 View this message in context:
 http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Burning-Man-old-data-publicity-opportunity-tp5772552p5803905.html
 Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] State ref tags on ways

[Brad Neuhauser]

That's totally where my mind went! :)


On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Martijn van Exel mart...@openstreetmap.us
 wrote:

 Hah. This should be an interesting one then, for trekkies at least:
 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/187922/7-9.png

 Create your own at http://shields.aaroads.com/generator.php

 Martijn

 On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
  Richard Weait writes:
- the concurrency of US1 and US 9, where ref=1-9 isn't numeric, but is
right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Route_1/9
 
  Interestingly Google Maps, when pronouncing directions, calls that US
  One To Nine.
 
  --
  --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
  Crynwr supports open source software
  521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
  Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



 --
 Martijn van Exel
 President, US Chapter
 OpenStreetMap
 http://openstreetmap.us/
 http://osm.org/

 ___
 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

Re: [OSM-talk] Best way to download data of route relations?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Here's a similar but more general query with OverpassTurbo if you want to
avoid all that punctuation ;)  http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2S9


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.comwrote:

 There was a question about bus routes/route relations just the other day.
 See my reply* at:
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-March/069413.html

 Using Overpass API you can extract a line for a bus route relation. By
 default you line is made up of all the roads that form part of the bus
 route with the roads being in OSM's XML format. You can also extract the
 line as GPX or as GeoJSON. Either way you will have to process the result
 to convert the collection or roads into a single line (if that's what you
 want).

 Regards,
 Rob

 * Note: The link at number [7] should be everything starting at http and
 ending body;. It should have a space between Travel and De (but no
 linebreak character).

 ___
 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: [Talk-us] Rural Montana - can we find local mappers?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Wolfgang, you might also try looking at contributors with activity in this
area, via the Who's Around Me? map. (
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/oooc?zoom=7lat=47.8062lon=-113.57002layers=B00FTT)
I don't see anyone active in the exact county you mention, but there are a
few fairly regular OSM users in Montana/Idaho who you might contact.

Brad


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Russell Deffner russdeff...@gmail.comwrote:

 Wolfgang,

 Lots of rural United States, as well as many places do not currently have a
 local mapping community.  We are working on it, and a good chance to
 'recruit' help is at the State of the Map - US (stateofthemap.us) coming
 up
 in a couple of weeks.  I am also co-organizer for OSM-Colorado
 ('unofficial'
 meetup.com group) and have been slowly spreading the message into Wyoming
 (which I believe is the least populous state); so I appreciate any
 suggestions, contacts, etc.

 Thank you,
 =Russ

 russdeff...@gmail.com
 http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/

 -Original Message-
 From: Wolfgang Zenker [mailto:wolfg...@lyxys.ka.sub.org]
 Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 2:20 PM
 To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [Talk-us] Rural Montana - can we find local mappers?

 Hi,

 for the last two years I have been cleaning up TIGER data and adding
 named waterways in Lincoln County, Montana. This work is now finished.
 This doesn't mean our map there is now in any way complete, just that
 the data that we DO have is no longer obviously horribly wrong.

 While there are still a few things that could be done by an armchair
 mapper, having local mappers would be a lot easier. Only the fact
 that the county has an average population density of 5 people per
 square mile might make it a bit unlikely that a lot of locals find
 OSM accidently. So some outreach to local groups and institutions
 like hiking clubs, tourist associations, boy and girl scouts,
 chambers of commerce etc. could be helpful.
 My problem here is that I'm living on a different continent, in
 a different cultural environment with a different native language
 and 8 time zones away, so I'm probably not the best choice to try
 connecting with local people in that area.
 Any US mappers that want to help? Please speak out.

 Wolfgang

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OHM] Should we map former endonyms?

[Brad Neuhauser]

You can enter whatever language codes you want in the Multilingual Map
Test, so for Finnish just enter fi in the text box.  (ex:
http://mlm.jochentopf.com/?zoom=7lat=52.57802lon=19.11621layers=B0Tlang=fi
)

To the original question, there is the old_name tag, which is documented on
the name page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name) and has almost
9 uses (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/old_name#overview). In
addition, the name page mentions the option of old_name:lang=* which
might best fit what you're looking for.  (there are even some uses of
old_name:fi=* already: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/old_name%3Afi)

Cheers, Brad


On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Laurence Penney l...@lorp.org wrote:

 It’s great to have such things mapped, but it does need care.

 In this field Jochen Topf coded “Multilingual Map Test” together back in
 2012. You might ask him to add Finnish to the languages offered.

 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-November/065312.html

 Here’s part of Poland, shown with German labels:


 http://mlm.jochentopf.com/?zoom=7lat=52.57802lon=19.11621layers=B0Tlang=de

 While the larger cities have well-known and current German names that are
 uncontroversial — Warschau, Posen, Breslau, etc. — many small towns and
 villages would only have been given German names during the Third Reich.

 It is therefore contentious to use the “name:de” tag for these places,
 unless one is making a map of occupied Poland during WW2. The naming was a
 political act, and most of the names were not used by Germans, even those
 living in the vicinity, before 1939 or after 1945. Taking politics out of
 it, perhaps one could use the date to indicate when the name was in use,
 thus a key of “name:de(1939-1945)”.

 It would be good to speak to historians who specialize in this area.

 - L

 On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:37, Chris Helenius chris.helen...@gmail.com wrote:

 How are historical place names from annexed countries regarded? Or put in
 another way; when does a name no longer exist?

 In the case on Finland, which lost Karelia to Russia in the 1950s,
 hundreds of place names were translated and are now officially Russian,
 with the Finnish population gone.
 Former place names could nevertheless be of historical value (e.g. to see
 the geographical extent of the language), as physical historical features
 are.

 The question is, does a name disappear when it is no longer used? Larger
 cities are still called by their Finnish names in a Finnish context, so
 would towns and villages be any different? Or when they are deserted?

 There is also the unignorable issue of geopolitics, as there are still
 tensions between the countries.
 There is no shortage of geographical naming disputes (
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Geographical_naming_disputes),
 and wikipedians themselves had a row over geographical names. (
 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/02/05/China_Japan_Wikipedia_War_Senkaku_Diaoyu?page=full
 )
 I can imagine how the naming could be seen having a political agenda.

 For what it's worth, my agenda is only historical, although I can't shrug
 off my national bias.
 Before I go and add name:fi= place-names, I'd like to hear what the
 community thinks of this.

 Chris Helenius
 ___
 Historic mailing list
 histo...@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic



 ___
 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] Not attaching polygons to roads

[Brad Neuhauser]

How about this?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Areas_and_Ways_Sharing_Nodes


On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:

 Hi

 There's a general consensus that attaching polygons to ways that represent
 roads was a bad idea. For example if a farm field was mapped this way then
 any barrier for it, such as hedge, gate etc, would appear to be on the road
 as well.

 I have a user who's repeatedly doing this.  I've tried sending messages,
 but no reply  I gave a detailed description in my amending changesets, but
 he just reverts them back.  Are there any wiki pages explaining it clearly
 that might convince him otherwise?

 Cheers
 Dave F.

 ---
 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
 protection is active.
 http://www.avast.com


 ___
 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: [Talk-us] Tags to use for chain stores in the United States

[Brad Neuhauser]

Personally, I tag big box stores like Target, KMart, WalMart etc with
shop=department_store, just because that seems like the closest fit that
isn't too restrictive (they're much more than a supermarket, to my mind).

You can pick an area and run Overpass Turbo and see what you get with
different tags, for example:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/?value=department_storekey=shoptemplate=key-value

Alternatively, you can run a search by name (ie
http://overpass-turbo.eu/?value=Targetkey=nametemplate=key-value) and see
what you get. I did this in Chicago, and found Targets tagged
department_store, supermarket, and hypermarket(!)

Brad


On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Russell Deffner russdeff...@gmail.comwrote:

 Seems the stores you listed are going to have different tags, example the
 'dollar' stores are probably best tagged shop=variety_store, the wiki has a
 pretty extensive list/description of the shop tags here:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop

 However, I would say that K-Mart, Target, and Wal-Mart (especially the
 'super' kind) maybe don't fit any of the documented tags; I think there was
 some talk about adding a big_box or superstore, maybe hit up the
 tagging
 talk-list to see if that's still in the works.

 =Russ

 -Original Message-
 From: Will Skora [mailto:skorasau...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 8:49 AM
 To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [Talk-us] Tags to use for chain stores in the United States

 Hi,

 At past OSM meetups that I've organized, new mappers have asked me
 what shop=* tags to use for several chain stores in the USA and I had
 not found any clear or consistent practices of what tags to use for
 these stores and even as a relatively experienced mapper, I wasn't
 sure what tags to encourage them to use.

 I am writing to hear what you've used, which ones are most popular,
 and perhaps the US community could build a consensus on them (gasp!).

 For example, several chain stores that we have wondered about include:
 K-Mart, Target, Wal-Mart, Dollar General, Dollar Tree, Family Dollar,
 'Bed, Bath, and Beyond'; TJ Maxx; Marshall's; Radio Shack; Meijer's;
 Kohl's; Costco; BJ's; and Big Lots.

 I know there's taginfo (including one for the US!
 taginfo.openstreetmap.us) but unfortunately, it doesn't let you find
 out what tag combinations are being used with a name=* (For example,
 finding what tag is used most often with name=Dollar-General).

 Regards,
 Will Skora

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Nearby Users

[Brad Neuhauser]

To highlight just one of Pascal's maps, there is a Newest OSM
Contributors map, and if you look at the fine print at the bottom, you can
create an RSS feed for a bounding box of your choosing.


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:50 AM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.ukwrote:

 Frederik Ramm wrote:

 I looked ad my personal nearby users list today for the first time
 in a while and found only 2 people with edits in the last year, 16
 people with no edits whatsoever, and the rest between over one year
 ago and over five years ago.


 (for the benefit of the tiny proportion of people who haven't seen it)
 other than the time element, Pascal Neis' site offers an excellent view of
 contributors locally, for example:

 http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/oooc?zoom=15lat=53.50327;
 lon=-1.1196layers=B00TFT

 Cheers,

 Andy



 ___
 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: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Brad Neuhauser]

From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Primary_.28one-_and_two-digit.29_routes_.28contiguous_U.S..29:

In the numbering scheme, east-west highways are assigned even numbers and
north-south highways are assigned odd numbers. Odd route numbers increase
from west to east, and even-numbered routes increase from south to north
(to avoid confusion with the U.S. Highways, which increase from east to
west and north to south), though there are exceptions to both principles in
several locations.


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:

 Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
 in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
 opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
 more like N/S on that stretch.)

 I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'
 directionality of the freeways?

 On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
 wrote:
  On 10/17/13 3:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
 
  The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass direction
 of
  the road.
 
  For example, this chunk of I-94 is facing south, but it's still
 eastbound
  I-94.
 
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899
 
  this is true of many roads, not just interstates. there's one NY state
 route
  in the Adirondacks that is C shaped, so it's official direction is only
  true for one of the three legs.
 
  richard
 
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 



 --
 Martijn van Exel
 http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
 http://openstreetmap.us/

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Question about incorrect data for an administrative area

[Brad Neuhauser]

Jay,

I don't think the data is incorrect.  If you look at the City of Las Vegas
webmap (
http://clvplaces.appspot.com/apps/interactive/clvpi.htm#ctrLat=36.27433191227921ctrLng=-115.18729447119142zoom=11layers=|10435|10010userMarkers=0mapType=roadmap)
and turn on the Cities and City Limits layers, you'll see that the City of
Las Vegas itself is just part of the Las Vegas urban area.  So,
administratively, those boundaries seem to be correct.

If you're concerned about what shows up in the openstreetmap.org Search (ie
- Nominatim), as Toby said, there are some issues.  However, I think
they're more with how Nominatim uses the data than the data itself.  One
way around it, which I mentioned in an earlier response, may be to use the
zip code instead of city name in a search.

Cheers,
Brad


On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Jay Boyer bo...@snhdmail.org wrote:

 I have been looking at the OSM data for Las Vegas and there are some
 serious problems for it.  The OSM boundary for Las Vegas encompasses about
 half of the city.  Certain areas of Las Vegas, including Paradise,
 Enterprise, Spring Valley and probably others are not within the city
 boundaries defined in OSM.  To fix this I need to expand the Las Vegas
 boundaries to encompass of these sections.  I have been looking and cannot
 find a way to do this efficiently.  Does anybody know of a way (aside from
 doing this manually) of expanding  and area to encompass another?

 ___
 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

Re: [Talk-us] Las Vegas region administrative areas

[Brad Neuhauser]

There is a place=town node for Enterprise, which is why Nominatim is
returning that. (
http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=3680398185)

The question in the forum is confusing the mailing city preferred by the
US Postal Service with the administrative area.  These often do not match
in the US.  If you omit the city (and even state) and just search for
Summers Ranch Ct, 89139, it returns the correct result.

Brad


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 2013/10/11 Mike N nice...@att.net

 There was a good question posted in the forum that I can't quite come up
 with a solution or recommendation.

   Re: place = locality in Las Vegas

 http://forum.openstreetmap.**org/viewtopic.php?id=22876http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=22876



 IMHO you'd tag place=town, name=Enterprise, as incorporated or not is an
 administrative classification and belongs to boundary and admin_level, not
 to place. place=locality is a tag not to be used for settlements or other
 places where there are people living.

 cheers,
 Martin

 ___
 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

Re: [OSM-talk] Making iD the default editor on osm.org

[Brad Neuhauser]

Back to the original question about iD being the default editor:

Originally at least part of the thinking behind iD was to have a
newbie-friendly editor [0].  As seen before and in this thread, more
advanced users want to keep adding functionality, which will tend to make
it less simple and friendly.  This is understandable for any number of
reasons (don't like Flash, know Potlatch 2 isn't being actively developed
any longer, don't want to use JOSM, want uniform options across editors,
etc).

Would it be make sense (and be possible) to have a super-basic version of
iD be the default, and have people be able to opt-in to a more advanced
version through their user preferences and/or the existing Edit tab
dropdown?  Maybe when you saved with the basic version, there could be a
prompt to try the more advanced version of iD?

This may be a pain technically or culturally (main issue being where do you
draw the line?  but really, would a total newbie need to edit
multipolygons, or create turn restrictions, or load custom imagery?).  Just
thought I'd bring it up.

Cheers, Brad

[0] from the iD wiki page: *iD* is an OpenStreetMap
editorhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editorprogrammed in
JavaScript http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:JavaScript (usable directly in
the browser) with the aims to be *simple* and *friendly*.

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:

 2013/8/19 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com



 Relations are fragile and if they are almost hidden for the mapper a
 warning should be the minimal precaution (or alternatively don't let iD
 users do these kind of edits where relations are involved and would be
 damaged).


 A turn restriction issue was opened on ID Github page 9 months ago, and I
 commented about preserving existing turn restrictions 5 months ago:

 https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/224#issuecomment-14895836

 I still think preserving existing relations should be a priority.

 Janko

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] Lake Powell

[Brad Neuhauser]

Gave it a go, but still hasn't rendered correctly.  Looks like there
might've been a separate relationship for each state's part of the lake and
they got broken somehow, probably in June.  I deleted one relation (370016)
and consolidated ways into http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=370015
The relationship looks good to me, but there must be something wrong
still.  Unless someone else figures it out in the meantime, I'll try to
look at it OSM Inspector once it refreshes and identify what the remaining
issue is.

Cheers,
Brad (aka neuhausr)

ps--really fun topography to view!


On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Russell Deffner russdeff...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hello OSM-US,

 ** **

 I was looking at notes and saw one over by Lake Powell, I think someone
 was trying to adjust the shoreline and broke the relationship.  Anyone
 listening who wants to try and fix?  Here’s the general location:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.9979190826416lon=-111.31210327148438zoom=11
 

 ** **

 Thanks, I don’t spend much time with water features and relationships;

 =Russ

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


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

[Talk-us] Removing US Bicycle Route tags

[Brad Neuhauser]

Kerry,

NE2 has been indefinitely banned (see
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2013-May/010867.html ) so
if you want these changed, have at it.

Cheers, Brad

On Wednesday, June 5, 2013, KerryIrons wrote:

 Nathan,

 3 months ago we discussed the existence of US Bicycle Route number tags in
 the Midwest.  The OSM consensus was clear: only approved US Bicycle Routes
 should be tagged in OSM.

 Since those routes (21, 25, 50, 80, 84 and 35 in Indiana) have not been
 approved by AASHTO it is incorrect to have them tagged in OpenStreetMaps.
 There are proposed routes for 35 and 50 in Indiana and part of 50 in Ohio
 but since those routes have not been approved by AASHTO the routes are
 subject to change during the implementation process.  There are no specific
 route proposals for 21, 25, 80, and 84.  Only 20 and 35 in Michigan have
 been approved.

 Please advise when you will remove these tags.



 Kerry Irons
 Adventure Cycling Association.



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

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

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

[Brad Neuhauser]

From Simon's description, I think this is the Geocode in question:
http://geocode.biz/


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Hugo Holscher hugoholsc...@gmail.comwrote:

   Hi Simon,

 that you may nor hear from them might be very true: see here:
 http://www.geocode.com/
 Is apparently part of TomTom, so if you need more info, might be handy to
 check with them. They are Dutch so if I can oblige, let me know, Hugo


  *From:* Simon Poole si...@osmfoundation.org
 *Sent:* Thursday, May 23, 2013 2:38 PM
 *To:* openstreetmap talk@openstreetmap.org ; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
 *Subject:* [Osmf-talk] Use of terms similar to GEOCODE

 

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

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

 **Simon
 **


 

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


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


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

Re: [Talk-us] Mapping Party

[Brad Neuhauser]

One thing I'd note *not* to do in the example Martijn sent: individual
buildings should not generally be tagged amenity=university, they should be
building=* (along with name and whatever other tags).  amenity=university
is for the overall area outline (or one central node if there isn't an area
way).  This tagging is covered on the amenity=university page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Duniversity

If you are unsure how to tag things, you can always search the wiki, post
here or on the tagging list, and/or use the OSM Help Forum:
https://help.openstreetmap.org/

Also, another thing I've noticed at many universities in OSM is that there
are often nodes for buildings from past GNIS import.  It's generally
recommended once you've created a building outline to move some/all of the
tags to the building way and remove the node, so there is just one feature
for that element.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#One_feature.2C_one_OSM_element

If you're using Potlatch 2, here's some tips on doing this: you can copy
tags from the last way you selected to the current way with the R key.  A
really easy way to move tags from a node to a way in P2 is to click on the
node, then shift-click away from it to create a rectangular way.  Then, you
can either edit that way, or click on a separate building outline you've
made and copy the tags with the R key.  In case it's useful, Potlatch 2
shortcuts are here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch_2/Shortcuts

Happy mapping!
Brad


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:

 That's great to hear!
 Putting CalU on the map sounds like a good objective; except for one
 building there is no trace of CalU on OSM as yet...
 Is this your first mapping party? Let us know if you need anything to help
 make it a success.

 If you need inspiration for things to map on a campus, have a look at some
 well-mapped campuses around the U.S. Here's our local campus:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.76435lon=-111.84401zoom=16layers=M

 Makes me think, what are some of the best mapped campuses in the U.S.?
 --
 Martijn van Exel

 On Apr 16, 2013, at 8:24 AM, Mueller, Thomas muel...@calu.edu wrote:

 Hello
 ** **
 My name is Tom Mueller and I am a GIS professor at California University
 of Pennsylvania.  I am also a new member of the OSM – US.  My class will be
 having our Cal U Mapping Party next week to add Cal U’s main campus to Open
 Street Map. 
 ** **
 Thank you
 Tom Mueller
 ** **
 ** **
 Thomas R. Mueller, Ph.D., GISP
 *Advisor: Geography Major with GIS and Emergency Management Concentration*

 *Co - Director: Pennsylvania View**
 *Department of Earth Sciences, California University of Pennsylvania
 A man never gets to this station in life without being helped, aided,
 shoved, pushed and prodded to do better. - Johnny Unitas
 ** **
 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do we have so many registered users with zero edits ?

[Brad Neuhauser]

I don't at all want to discourage improvements, the efforts of the WWG,
etc, but at the same time we have to be clear that this kind of ratio
is pretty common amongst crowd sourced projects.  For example, if you look
at English Wikipedia's stats, there are over 800K wikipedians (and
note, they've made at least 10 edits; I couldn't find stats that
included users with fewer total edits).  Of them, only about 3 make at
least 5 edits in any given month.  For the details, see
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm

Regards, Brad

On Friday, April 12, 2013, Johan C wrote:

 OSM has got over 1,1 million registered users now. About 20.000 of them
 frequently make edits. There's still a lot of opportunities here, because
 all registered users at least have some interest in OSM. The question is:
 how do we unlock this giant community potential?

 Cheers, Johan


 2013/4/12 Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
 'j...@liotier.org');

  Looking at the profiles of nearby mappers displayed on my profile page's
 map, I am astonished to find that most of them have made zero edits.
 Those people went through the effort of registering (some even added an
 avatar picture) but then did not use their account for anything - no edits,
 no traces, nothing. Why ? Are these mere spam registrations or are we
 actually losing good potential mappers in the first hours of their life
 as Openstreetmap users ? How many of them do we have ? Do we have logs
 that we can analyze to understand how they came to Openstreetmap and how
 they dropped out ?


 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
 'talk@openstreetmap.org');
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



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

Re: [Talk-us] Is there a great geo event that we don't have on our calendar yet? Let me know!

[Brad Neuhauser]

How about the 2013 Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial North
America (FOSS4G-NA) conference?  It'll be May 22-24 in Minneapolis, MN

http://foss4g-na.org/

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote:


 http://www.openstreetmap.us/calendar/

 Alex Barth
 http://twitter.com/lxbarth
 tel (+1) 202 250 3633





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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] RFC - OSM contributor mark

[Brad Neuhauser]

There's some teardrop designs on this page (which is linked to from the
logo design competitions):
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Logo

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org wrote:

 Simon - thanks! But... I didn't see any teardrops or armpits there - is
 there another place to look for past teardrops?


 On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/Logos#Logo_design_**competitionshttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Logos#Logo_design_competitions

 Am 14.01.2013 19:12, schrieb Jeff Meyer:

  Are there any links to past design comps? Past teardrops? Dare I ask,
 past armpits?



 __**_
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talkhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




 --
 Jeff Meyer
 Global World History Atlas
 www.gwhat.org
 j...@gwhat.org
 206-676-2347
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer osm: Historical 
 OSMhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historical_OSM
  / my OSM user page http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer
  t: @GWHAThistory https://twitter.com/GWHAThistory
  f: GWHAThistory https://www.facebook.com/GWHAThistory




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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Data copied from Google Maps

[Brad Neuhauser]

From the dates, it looks like most of those are from the Haiti earthquake
tracing, when Google allowed OSM to use its imagery for tracing.  See
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/Imagery_and_data_sources#Google_Imagery

Cheers, Brad

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Andrew MacKinnon andrew...@gmail.comwrote:

 I have discovered a lot of data in OSM that appears to have been
 copied from Google Maps. See
 http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source#values and type google
 into the search box. There appear to be over 3 objects in the OSM
 database copied from Google. Anyone willing to help delete data and
 warn users? (It is a LOT of work to do this myself). Please beware
 that some of these objects may have been modified by innocent users
 afterward, please check the history to see which user originally added
 it.

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tags for Emergency Interstate

[Brad Neuhauser]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_route#Emergency_detour_routes

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:19 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote:


 What is an emergency Interstate?  I don't think I have ever heard that
 phrase before.  Is it a detour to be used while the Interstate highway is
 under repair?

 --
 John F. Eldredge --  j...@jfeldredge.com
 Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not
 to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] National Map Corps Revived - And Using the OSM Stack

[Brad Neuhauser]

I watched it after Ian sent the link.  According to the video, it uses
Potlatch 2 to gather a very limited set of POIs in the initial pilot area
of Colorado.  I was kind of curious if there was going to be any
interaction with OSM other than using the tool stack.

Brad

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yep. They announced it prematurely. They'll have more information about it
 in the near future.


 On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Adam Schreiber 
 adam.schreiber+...@gmail.com wrote:

 Ian,

 The link appears to be dead.  Was the video taken down?

 Cheers,

 Adam

 On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi everyone,
 
  I saw a tweet from @USGS today mentioning that the National Map Corps
 are
  starting up again. If you don't know what the National Map Corps is,
 think
  of it like OpenStreetMap for the US Government. Volunteer mappers
  correcting and adding to the topo maps all over the country. I'm sure
 there
  are others with much more information, but it was a pretty epic project
 and
  is the source for lots of the free and public domain data we use to this
  day.
 
  For the last year or two (or three?) Eric Wolf's been working to adapt
 the
  OpenStreetMap stack to the USGS's needs, and it looks like it that work
 has
  finally been released. Check out this video for more information:
  http://gallery.usgs.gov/videos/552. Skip to 4:10 or so to see it in
 action.
 
  Hopefully Eric and others will respond here and tell us more about it!
 
  -Ian
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 



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


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

Re: [Talk-us] More things that are no longer there: schools.

[Brad Neuhauser]

If the building is still there, but not used as a school, I'd tag the
building with old_name=[school_name].  Sometimes the name is still chiseled
on the side somewhere.  Brad

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Kevin Kenny kken...@nycap.rr.com wrote:

 As I've mentioned in the past, I have some personal mapping projects
 that use OSM data.

 One at least one of them, I display icons for facilities such as
 schools, hospitals, police and fire stations, and houses of worship.
 I notice that a great many of the schools that appear in the generated
 map are, in fact, not usable as landmarks, because the map is reporting
 places where schoolhouses once stood; in many cases the sites have been
 redeveloped and no trace of the historic school remains, or the site
 has changed hands and the historic schoolhouse is now a private home.
 For many of the old schoolhouses, it certainly isn't obvious from the
 street that they were ever anything but private homes.

 I see that these tend to have (historical) ending their names. Is
 this generally a reliable indicator? Is there another tag I should be
 looking for to tell me there was once a school here, but there is
 no longer? I don't see anything obvious, for instance, in the feature
 with OSM ID = 375600685 to distinguish it from an active school.

 If there is no reliable information distinguishing historical schools,
 and if I were to attempt to correct the situation in areas where I have
 personal knowledge, is there any consensus on the correct way to tag
 these objects? I surely don't want to revert someone else's edits
 simply because they contain data that do not interest me, but is there
 any way that I can start being able to filter them?

 I have read 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/USGS_GNIShttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/USGS_GNIS-
  but I find
 it uninformative for answering this question. I see the instruction,
 If you come across a feature that no longer exists in the real world,
 feel free to delete it, but what's the right thing to do with a
 former schoolhouse that still stands as a private house? It exists,
 but it is not in service nor any longer easily identifiable as a school.

 And please, don't flame me. This is simply a question about, if I
 wish to exclude historical schools from a rendered map, is there a
 way to identify them in order that I can do so? I advance no position
 about whether they ought or ought not be in OSM.  I recognize that
 they must have been of value to whoever put them there, and respect
 that.

 If my question has no good answer, I'd rather tolerate the clutter
 than mess up the map.

 --
 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin

 __**_
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [Talk-us] One click quality printed maps (as an OSM advantage)

[Brad Neuhauser]

Also:
-Export images using the Export tab
-Walking Papers  http://walking-papers.org/  (my favorite quick printed map
solution)

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:27 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:

 On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:16 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com
 wrote:
 
  There's something OSM could do well, that Google Maps can't, due to
  licensing restrictions: create good printable maps.  Google and Mapquest
  both are pretty bad.
 
  The high volume use cases:
  * Printing a map for take along navigation, on a standard printer.
  * Exporting a map for embedding in fliers or printed material.  GM and
  Mapquest terms of service prohibit this.
 
  If OSM was the go to place for getting useful printed maps, it could
 bring
  additional people into the OSM community.
  Thoughts?


 Maposmatic - pretty one page map with street index.
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maposmatic

 Appears idle
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ImgAtlas

 Perhaps this one for multipage?
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hikingbook.pl

 Poster and mural-sized big maps (mind the tile usage policy)
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bigmap

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?

[Brad Neuhauser]

just an FYI--some states have laws limiting who can access voter data
and/or what purposes the data can be used for (usually related to
elections/campaigning)

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:

 Voter records are a good idea.  And business registration records /
 business tax records also.  I think getting the business addresses is
 going to be the harder task.  But maybe if we merge data from multiple
 sources we can get a decent portion of it.

 On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT)
 calvin.metc...@state.ma.us wrote:
  To suplimnett it you could use the voter file, it'll have all the
 residential addresses, while not usefull on its own it'll give you fairly
 acurate ranges for residential streets.
  in america its public domain, getting it can be tricky and usually
 involves requesting it from towns
  Sent with Verizon Mobile Email
 
 
  ---Original Message---
  From: Anthony o...@inbox.org
  Sent: 11/14/2011 9:36 pm
  To: Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com
  Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?
 
  On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com
 wrote:
  The parcel data is a superset of address data...
 
  Not when there's more than one address to a parcel, which around here
  unfortunately is a common occurrence in exactly the places where
  address information is most useful (strip malls and such).
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] County borders vs. State borders

[Brad Neuhauser]

About Minnesota's counties on Lake Superior, the Census has county
boundaries going to the state border with WI/MI, and I'm assuming they did
their homework. Still, I'll try to double check the legal definitions
today.  Brad

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:


 I would recommend contacting the MN state gis department, which might be
 part of the state highway department.  There are probably people there
 who understand the rules and can point you to them.  Someone from
 MassGIS was very helpful when I had questions about town lines.

 As an example which won't help you in MN and IA, but will give you an
 idea of how hard this can be:

  http://www.mass.gov/mgis/townssurvey.htm

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] County borders vs. State borders

[Brad Neuhauser]

OK, hoping would be more accurate than assuming  :)  Thanks for finding
the general statutes online, Nathan!

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:

 On 10/18/2011 8:44 AM, Brad Neuhauser wrote:

 the Census has county  boundaries going to the state border with WI/MI,
 and I'm assuming they did their homework.


 Don't assume anything when it comes to TIGER.


 Anyway, Cook County was defined in 1874 to include the water to the state
 line: 
 http://books.google.com/books?**id=juwkYAAJpg=PA116http://books.google.com/books?id=juwkYAAJpg=PA116and
 https://www.revisor.mn.gov/**statutes/?id=2.01year=2011https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=2.01year=2011says
  that it hasn't been amended since then.


 __**_
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [Talk-us] Announcement: Address Improvement project

[Brad Neuhauser]

Calvin, getting back to your original comment, what exactly do you mean use
ZIP codes?  They are currently tagged with the key addr:postcode.  Are you
proposing an import or some other way to use the Census ZCTA data?  Brad

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) 
calvin.metc...@state.ma.us wrote:

 census is bad for places that DON'T have people but especialy when you
 build your data set off the block layer the shapes will include all the
 addresses they need to but will miss some strange ones (like theme parks)
 Sent with Verizon Mobile Email


 ---Original Message---
 From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
 Sent: 10/5/2011 9:37 pm
 To: calvin.metc...@dot.state.ma.us
 Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Announcement: Address Improvement project

 On 10/5/2011 9:15 PM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) wrote:
  In MA they are good in they are precise
 How have you tested this?

   don't know about the rest of the country but say wht you will about
 the census they tend to get the areas right in the sense of getting all
 the houses.
 In Florida, they omit 32830, which has been Walt Disney World's zip code
 since it opened in 1971.
 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [Talk-us] What does the community want from a US local chapter?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Brian, just to save you the trouble, the closest there is to a standard is
the FHWA Highway Functional Classification System.  There's a wiki page [1]
and lengthy discussion about its pros and cons on this page if you want to
wade through [2].  Definitely would be a new thread if you want to continue
that discussion...

Brad

[1]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Functional_Classification_System
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Functional_Classification_System
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_roads_tagging

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Brian Wilson br...@wildsong.biz wrote:

  Personally I'd think a per-state consensus would already be quite good.
  Greece and Norway use different tagging schemes - so why would anyone be
  held back if Texas uses something other than Alaska?

 Simply put, Greece and Norway are different countries. When I drive
 across the border into California, we still use the same nomenclature
 for roads.

 Having 50 committees to decide the naming is another way of saying it
 will never happen.

 When I was on the Bike/Ped committee in my town (not this one) the
 traffic engineers referred to AASHTO for standards. (See
 transportation.org.) My guess is they have standards for it already.
 I'd start by finding out if that's true and then put their names into
 the wiki as the starting point. Asking Portland Metro for help would
 be a good idea, I will write to them directly in a moment but I am
 pretty sure they read this list.

 I know looking at the Brit names in OSM that they don't work here, we
 are two countries separated by a common language.

 --
 Brian Wilson
 Corvallis Oregon

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] Brainstorm: What should a US map of OSM data look like

[Brad Neuhauser]

Towns appear at zoom level 9 in Mapnik, which seems pretty decent to me.
 There are tagged towns in SW Kansas that show up, but some villages
probably need retagging to towns in the N and W.  The Place page
recommends tagging county seats as towns regardless of population:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Place   I started upgrading some county
seats in NW MN to town, which helps fill things in, I think:
http://osm.org/go/WprNC4--http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.299lon=-96.132zoom=9layers=M

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.299lon=-96.132zoom=9layers=MBrad

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:

 This might be partially a tagging issue but I think it affects rendering
 too.

 It would be nice to change the zoom level at which cities/towns are
 rendered in rural areas. I should not be able to get a map with no place
 names on it in western Kansas

 Toby
 On Sep 12, 2011 6:15 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] [KS] anyone familiar with this area?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Wow, what would one tag the Acid Disposal ponds?

Much of the TIGER data comes from USGS topos, including this:
 http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=38.92299,-95.01328z=15t=T
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] http://sautter.com/map/ display problem

[Brad Neuhauser]

If you zoom out all the way, it looks like there's a projection issue with
the Bing base layer and any of the overlays.  Brad

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:

 http://sautter.com/map/

 I can't speak German so I not sure if it's a known problem, but I can't get
 OSM to display as an overlay when I select Bing aerial as the background. It
 just loads pink tiles. It's been like that for a while.

 Are others getting this fault?

 Cheers
 Dave F.

 __**_
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talkhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

[Brad Neuhauser]

I do my best to avoid anything to do with highway relations, but FWIW I
recently did just this in Potlatch 2--split a way that's part of relations
to add a bridge and totally ignored the relations--and it all worked out
fine as far as I can tell: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/126659318


On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:

 Sent again; sorry to people who receive multiple copies due to moderation.


 On 8/21/2011 4:34 PM, Ian Dees wrote:

 I really don't understand this logic. I have never run into a case where
 JOSM has broken a relation in a way that wasn't obvious to me. Obviously
 I don't get around as much as you, Nathan, but can you remind me of a
 specific case where a relation breaks over the course of normal editing?


 The real problem is that there's no way to show the former state of a
 relation, and I tend to fix errors whenever I find them. I know I've
 recently fixed US 10 in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, mostly where it
 overlaps with Interstates. If you're better than me at figuring out the
 history, see: 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/**browse/changeset/5247114http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5247114


 The most common problem I see is when someone splits a way to create a
 bridge, and for whatever reason the newly-created ways aren't part of the
 relation.


 __**_
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-ushttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Moving Map on Netbook?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Just a guess here, but could it be related to Charlie Foxtrot?

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 3:10 AM, kenneth gonsalves law...@thenilgiris.comwrote:

 On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 10:01 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
  On 08/05/11 04:29, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
   Please keep in mind that development of tangoGPS stopped a while
  ago, and
   forked into FoxtrotGPS (which works pretty nicely as I recall)
 
  It seems the tango thing does what I need but I'll check out the
  other
  one nonetheless. After years of OSM, I'm slightly averse to anything
  with foxtrot in its name though.

 what's with foxtrot?


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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Detecting deleted data?

[Brad Neuhauser]

In Potlatch 1:

   - Press 'U' (for undelete).
   - All the deleted ways will show up as bright red (locked) lines. Locked
   ways are not written to the server.
   - Select the one you want to undelete, and edit it if necessary.
   - Unlock it by clicking the Click to unlock bar.
   - Click elsewhere on the map to deselect it, and write it to the server.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch_1/Primer#Undoing_mistakes

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi all,
  How does one go about finding out if there used to be data in a
 certain area? My memory may be faulty, but I seem to recall that there
 used to be ski lift and trail data here: http://osm.org/go/uMQEXjno--.
 But at the moment there isn't. The history button doesn't seem to be
 useful - it seems to show every changeset whose bounding box includes
 the area I'm looking at - even when nothing affected by the changeset
 is within the area. There's also no summarised metadata about
 changesets showing which changesets might include a lot of deletions.

 Steve

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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-talk-fr] South Sudan, the world's newest Country

[Brad Neuhauser]

Ogle Earth blog has a thorough discussion of the boundary issues regarding
South Sudan:
http://ogleearth.com/2011/07/mapping-south-sudans-northern-border-not-so-fast/

Not sure if it warrants any changes in the OSM border, but interesting
either way.

Cheers, Brad

2011/7/9 Vincent Privat vincent.pri...@gmail.com

 Is there only someone right ? *Le Monde* suggests today there are still
 some disagreements on the exact border location [1] [2].

 Vincent

 [1]
 http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2011/07/09/le-sud-soudan-proclame-son-independance_1546977_3212.html#ens_id=1067666
 [2]
 http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2011/07/09/quelles-relations-entre-le-soudan-et-le-nouvel-etat-du-sud-soudan_1546677_3212.html

 ---

 Y-a-t'il seulement un bon tracé ? Deux articles du Monde soulignent
 aujourd'hui des désaccords entre les 2 Etats sur le tracé exact de la
 frontière [1] [2].

 Je cite:
 *Les dirigeants du Nord et ceux du Sud ne se sont toujours pas mis
 d'accord sur un ensemble de questions sensibles, dont les plus importantes
 concernent le tracé de la frontière*
 *La question ... n'est pas réglée... Il en va de même pour plusieurs
 portions litigieuses de la nouvelles frontières entre les deux pays.*

 Vincent
 [1]
 http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2011/07/09/le-sud-soudan-proclame-son-independance_1546977_3212.html#ens_id=1067666
 [2]
 http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2011/07/09/quelles-relations-entre-le-soudan-et-le-nouvel-etat-du-sud-soudan_1546677_3212.html

 Le 9 juillet 2011 14:15, RatZilla$ ratzil...@gmail.com a écrit :

 Hi all,

 Successfully convert UNITAR datasets with ogr2osm from Ivan Sanchez:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ogr2osm

 But it seems to have a gap of 8kms from the actual border ??
 Who is right ? I think it's Unitar because some river are right placed.

 I'm available for sharing OSM's converted datasets for quality control
 and discussions.

 Gaël

 ---

 Conversion réussie des jeux de données UNITAR avec ogr2osm d'Ivan Sanchez
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ogr2osm

 Il y a un décalage de 8kms avec la frontière actuelle dans OSM ??
 Je pense que le tracée UNITAR est le bon car il correspond avec les
 cours d'eau déjà mappés.

 A votre disposition pour la mise à dispo des jeux de données UNITAR
 convertis en .osm pour le contrôle qualité et les discussions.


 Gaël

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



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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Japan KSJ2 Import

[Brad Neuhauser]

FYI, the import wiki page is
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/Japan_KSJ2_Import and
there's separate sub-pages for each type of data.  It looks like User:Tatata
wrote one script being used?

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:

 Hi,

   is someone on this list involved in OSM in Japan? I'll go to talk-jp with
 the issue if not, but maybe the right people are reading this here also.

 I noticed that a lot of data has been imported from a KSJ2 data set, and
 this data has many tags that I consider unnecessary.

 The whole import seems to comprise about 3.5 million nodes, 680k ways, and
 9000 relations.

 3.3 million nodes are tagged with something like

tag k=KSJ2:coordinate v=32.787857 130.687672/
tag k=KSJ2:lat v=32.787857/
tag k=KSJ2:long v=130.687672/

 which means that the node coordinates are stored three times - once in the
 node itself and twice in the tags.

 About 3.3 million objects are tagged with something like

tag k=note v=National-Land Numerical Information (Railway) 2007,
 MLIT Japan/
tag k=note:ja v=??(?)??19??/
tag k=source v=KSJ2/
tag k=source_ref v=http://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/**
 ksj/jpgis/datalist/KsjTmplt-**N02-v1_1.htmlhttp://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/ksj/jpgis/datalist/KsjTmplt-N02-v1_1.html
 /

 which is a lot of text where in my opinion a simple source tag on the
 changeset would have been sufficient. (The overwhelming majority of
 source_ref tags, 2.9 million, point to KsjTmplt-N03.html, but another 17
 are in use; the distribution for note:ja is similar, with two messages being
 used 1.8 and 1.0 million times respectively, and a handful of others in
 use.)

 3.1 million nodes used by ways are tagged with something like

tag k=KSJ2:curve_id v=c00100298/
tag k=KSJ2:filename v=N03-090320_40_new.xml/

 which strikes me as a bit unnecessary as well; if really required, then
 that could go on the way using the nodes and not on every single node!

 In addition to that, we have 1.1 million objects tagged with

tag k=created_by v=National-Land-Numerical-**
 Information_MLIT_Japan/

 - also something that we usually but on changesets, and that seems to
 duplicate information already in the source and note tags.

 There are also about 360k occurrences, on nodes used by ways, of the tags
 KSJ2:INT, KSJ2:INT_label, KSJ2:LIN, KSJ2:OPC, KSJ2:RAC; I have no idea what
 these are for but do they have to go on the nodes really?

 I would like to see this (in my opinion) superfluous information removed.
 We would get rid of about 30 million tags. The size of the Japan dataset (in
 XML form) would shrink by 13% from 13.1 to 11.5 GB, the .osm.pbf would
 shrink by 14% from 585 to 501 MB. About 1 GB of database storage would be
 saved on the central OSM database server.

 Needless to say, any software that processes the Japan dataset would also
 run faster and consume less resources.

 Can anybody comment on this? Are any of the tags that I mentioned above
 actually used by anyone for anything?

 In addition, there are 22 multipolygons from the same import, with more
 than 1000 members each (the top three being #1337942 with 10865 members,
 #1060553 with 5637, and #1069424 with 4518). While it is not wrong for a
 multipolygon to have so many members, this makes the affected areas very
 difficult to render and edit, and has the potential to bring unsuspecting
 relation processing software to a halt. Most of these multipolygons cannot
 even be downloaded via the API becuase it takes so long. I would like these
 multipolygons (all natural=wood I believe) split up into smaller entities.

 It would be great if someone involved with the Japan community could deal
 with these issues; but I would also be willing to do it myself if that's ok
 with the community in Japan.

 Finally, I am unsure if the KSJ2 import is even complete; if it is not, and
 still ongoing, then the numbers reported above might not even be the last
 word. In that case I would like to ask whoever is masterminding the import
 to maybe modify their scripts to include less superfluous tags. (Objects in
 question seem to be uploaded by a variety of users so I cannot detect from
 the object history alone who runs the import.)

 Bye
 Frederik

 --
 Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

 __**_
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talkhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tag AND_a_nosr_p and source=AND?

[Brad Neuhauser]

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:57 PM, Joseph Koshy joseph.ko...@gmail.comwrote:

 I have seen the tags AND_a_nosr_p=NUMBER and source=AND
 associated with some nodes in OpenStreetMap.  For example:

  http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/245622615/history

 Would anyone know what the context for these tags is?   I can't seem
 to find documentation for the 'AND_a_nosr_p' tag, or the 'source=AND'
 annotation in OpenStreetMap's wiki.

 -- Koshy

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] place=city name=Tri-Cities

[Brad Neuhauser]

I think some are legit.  In the case of the Twin Cities, the area isn't just
an urban agglomeration, it's major cities that are very tightly
interconnected, socially, economically, and governmentally, in addition to
geographically (and historically).  When talking about the region, residents
may use Twin Cities fairly interchangably with Minneapolis and St Paul.

Another example is the Quad Cities in Illinois/Iowa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quad_Cities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quad_CitiesBrad

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:

 Seems like out here in Kansas/Nebraska a lot of cities are a member of
 some tri-city region but I think it is almost always made up by the
 local weather man who just wants a quick way to refer to this area
 here while pointing at his magic green screen. It is nothing I would
 want to see on a map.

 For example I have often seen Kearney, Hastings and Grand Island
 called the tri-cities by local TV stations.
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.821lon=-98.641zoom=9layers=M

 I think they may have a hockey team that is kind of a shared interest
 between the cities but other than that I don't think there is much
 interaction between them and I wouldn't see any need to enter this
 information into OSM.

 Toby


 On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:40 AM,  j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
  Another example is the Tri-Cities area in northeast Tennessee (Bristol,
 Kingsport, and Johnson City).  Certain facilities, such as the Tri-Cities
 Airport, are shared.  Road signs refer to both the Tri-Cities area and the
 individual cities.  Since Bristol extends across the state line,
 administratively it is two cities, namely Bristol, Tennessee and Bristol,
 Virginia.
 
  ---Original Email---
  Subject :Re: [Talk-us] place=city name=Tri-Cities
  From  :mailto:jumba...@gmail.com
  Date  :Thu Feb 24 08:19:55 America/Chicago 2011
 
 
  Officially, there are the Census Metropolitan Statistical Areas, which
 are
  roughly equivalent to many of the colloquially used metro areas.  These
 are
  not administrative regions,  although some may coincide with some
  administrative regions.  I do think it would be valuable to somehow tag
 these
  areas.
 
  James
 
  On Thursday 24 February 2011 08:58:02 McGuire, Matthew wrote:
  Without knowing the area, I can only speculate that Tri-Cities is a
  locally common name for the entire metro, but assuming it is, I like the
  way it looks on Mapnik, so it seems like a case of tagging for the
  renderer. How about place=metro?
 
  More could be done with metro areas. For example, OSM Mapnik renders the
  Saint Paul label at a 'higher' level than Minneapolis. Is there some way
  to identify Minneapolis as the largest city of the metro area and Saint
  Paul as the Capitol of the State of Minnesota? I don't see anything in
 the
  Map Features tags that would allow this. Locally, the entire metro area
 is
  frequently known as The Twin Cities, and together Minneapolis and
 Saint
  Paul are a primate city.
 
  I don't know of a way to represent (data-wise) the metro areas as one
  single place. The result is, I'm now looking at a map with labels for
  Trenton, Wilmington, Newark, Huntington NY, and Stamford CT but not New
  York City and Philadelphia.  A place=metro tag and relations would allow
  that - if the renderer so chose.
 
  Matt
 
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Nathan Edgars II [mailto:nerou...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:07 PM
  To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools; OpenStreetMap talk-us
 list
  Subject: [Talk-us] place=city name=Tri-Cities
 
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/876536239
  There's no city named Tri-Cities; this is the name of the metropolitan
  area that comprises Pasco, Kennewick, and Richland. I assume there's no
  defensible reason to keep it tagged as such, but what should be done
  about it?
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 
  --
  John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
  Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than
 not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria
  ___
  Talk-us mailing list
  Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] Sevier Lake Anomaly

[Brad Neuhauser]

You're both right  :)  Check it out Toby:
http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/instr.htm

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
  The OpenCycleMap elevation data comes from the SRTM dataset, which was
  obtained by taking stereoscopic images from the Space Shuttle.

 I thought the R stood for Radar, not steReoscopic? But yes, SRTM data
 is known for being flaky.

 Toby

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:02 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 2010/10/20 Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com:
  Aren't admin_level and place getting at slightly different things?
   admin_level is to mark official political/legal boundaries.  place is to
  mark a...well...place that has a name, and the
  place=city|town|village|hamlet does not necessarily align with the type
 of
  government (if any) of the place.  From the place page:
  In most Western countries, the status of a location (whether it is a
  city/town/etc.), is decided by the government, and is not a function of
  size. ***But most OSM communities of those countries have made a
 convention
  to use the population to decide which place tag to use, to ensure a more
  common way of tagging across the globe, and not to end up with cities of
  1000 residents for example.***  Just like the term township that Ant
  linked to, the same word can have different meanings in different
 contexts.
  Brad


 personally I think that the wiki is not very good at this point. The
 criteria to decide between town and village and between village and
 hamlet is IMHO a functional and often historic and traditional one. Is
 there a market place? Is there a church? Is there a townhall? What was
 the status in the past? Are there city-walls? Are there other town
 specific functions like a university, a hospital? etc. This might not
 be valid in all regions, but for Europe it is definitely the case. The
 general numbers (1000 /1 / 10) proposed in the wiki are IMHO
 definitely too big on the lower end. For Germany we concluded hamlet 
 200 and village  2000 (which might be better values for Europe in
 general), but this doesn't mean there can't be villages with 5000
 inhabitants as well. Basically the size of the population is only a
 rough guideline but cannot substitute further analysis.

 While you might argue that we (OSM) are not interested in history in
 the first place it is IMHO unneglectible that the historic relevance
 had huge impact on the organization of the territory. E.g. the street
 grid (as well as railways) is no something constructed in 20 years
 from zero (at least in Europe or Asia) but is a structure that was
 evolving for hundreds if not thousands of years.

 In the US the history of a place might be shorter, but you might still
 be able to apply functional criteria IMHO.

 cheers,
 Martin


Functional (subjective) tagging versus tagging to a set standard (objective)
is one underlying reason why US highway tagging is so inconsistent--some in
the US community want a consistent schema that works in all situations,
others want to allow some fuzziness based on the local situation.

Regarding the wiki page, Martin, it's not just not very good on the point
you make--the point is totally missing.  If the things you mentioned are
usually factored into the tagging decision, then that should be added to the
page.

Thanks, Brad



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

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Peter Budny pet...@gatech.edu wrote:

 Andrew S. J. Sawyer assaw...@gmail.com writes:

  My thoughts are mixed in below.
 
  On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:17, Peter Budny pet...@gatech.edu wrote:
 
  Antony Pegg anttheli...@gmail.com writes:
 
   tagging admin area / populated centers / labels in USA seems to
   come down to two main tags:
  
   admin_level and place
 
  Before you over-simplify, let me point out a couple things:
 
  1. Not all of the US is incorporated.  In the Northeast, every tiny
 part
  of land is incorporated into a town or township or borough.  But in
 the
  Southeast (and I presume elsewhere as well), there's lots of
  unincorporated land, even in the vicinity of large cities.  Look at
  Atlanta, which still has lots of unincorporated area.
 
  That's a big variation, and the map needs to be equally competent at
  handling both regions.
 
  Slight correction, not all land in the Northeast is incorporated. In New
  Hampshire there are a handful of communities which are not
  incorporated.

 I was exaggerating to illustrate the differences, but point taken.
 
  2. Defining how important a city is (and thus, how big its label on
  the map should be) is a tricky thing to do.  Population is certainly
 a
  large factor, but how do you define this?  The City of Atlanta is the
  #33 most populous city in the US, with 540,000 people, but the
 Atlanta
  metropolitan area is #9 with 5,475,000 people and is the largest
 metro
  area in 800 miles.
 
  There's also a recognition factor... the whole world knows where New
  York is and would expect it to be fairly prominent on a map.  Capitol
  cities are considered to be important even when they're not very
  prominent or populous.  Etc.
 
  It seems to me that admin_level handles the first point, except that
 4
  levels to cover all of the US doesn't give much granularity.  Maybe
 we
  need to think about using the in-between levels to show more detail?
 
  place= seems to be handling the second point, but not very well.
  Should
  label sizes really be determined purely by population?  By
 importance?
  What criteria should there be?  I don't think the current scheme of
  city/town/whatever is very good, because it's another instance of
  hacking a British scheme onto a country with a very different history
  and organization.
 
  I agree that there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach that will work
  with displaying/tagging named communities on the map. I think that a
  combination of the size of the given area, the admin_level of the
  given area (country, state, county, etc), population and
  recognizability (capital cities, etc). The latter being the most
  difficult to quantify in a manner in which many people would agree on
  (less capital cities).

 I forgot to mention control cities (
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_city).
 These are cities that are designated for use on highway signs to
 indicate which direction you're heading.  These should definitely appear
 on the map, even if they're relatively small cities (e.g. Valdosta,
 Georgia).

  However, I agree that a ratio of area, admin_level and population
  could take care of most cases.

 This gets me wondering if maybe there's some way to do it more
 automatically.  For instance, it should be easy to find data sources
 for population, area, and lists of global cities
 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city) and control cities.  Maybe
 there should be a process just before the renderer that takes in that
 information and decides how to label cities automatically.  That keeps
 the OSM database down to the basics.
 --
 Peter Budny  \
 Georgia Tech  \
 CS PhD student \



If you haven't seen it, the 41Latitude blog had an earlier post about
getting a good density of US city names at different zoom levels--it was in
reference to Bing maps, but the same ideas apply:
http://www.41latitude.com/post/931787074/improving-bing-maps-3

In his analysis, using the Census' Urban Clusters and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas looked useful.  Worth a read, if you're still following
this thread.  :)
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
  On 10/20/2010 03:01 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
 
  Townships are at the same level as cities/towns/villages/other
  municipalities[1], [2]. I’m sure someone correct me if I’m wrong, but my
  understanding is you won’t find a chunk of land that is both
  “city|village|etc.” and “township” simultaneously; cities et al. can
  annex portions of townships easily, but they then are no longer part of
  that township.
 
  Scratch that.  Eleven states allow overlap[1]:
 
  Indiana, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
  Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and Vermont

 (note that these are not all called townships:
 http://www.census.gov/govs/go/township_terms.html)
 
  admin_level=7 it is.

 Only in those states, of course. In Pennsylvania and New Jersey (and
 apparently the Dakotas?) it should remain admin_level=8.


 FYI, it's the same with Minnesota: cities and townships are legally
different forms of municipalities (one incorporated, one unincorporated).
 Minnesota also has unorganized areas, which are legally under the
jurisdiction of the county, but which may have clusters of population that
would warrant a place in OSM (call them what you will--village, hamlet
whatever)
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Brad Neuhauser]

To save you some work, you might look at this report, Government
Organization, published in 2002 by the Census:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/gc021x1.pdf

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:

 On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
  At the very least it would be nice to have a table outlining exactly
  what municipality or minor civil division means for each state.
  Is there one somewhere already?  Should I start one?

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_municipalities

 Can someone please turn off my need to constantly enter a capatcha
 (User:User_5528)?

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Not that it matters greatly for this discussion, but in Minnesota
municipalities do include cities and townships. Ex:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?year=2010id=462.352 (subd. 2) or
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=200.02 (subd. 9).  Definitions
aren't the same in every state...

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:

 On 10/20/2010 04:07 PM, Brad Neuhauser wrote:

 Only in those states, of course. In Pennsylvania and New Jersey (and
 apparently the Dakotas?) it should remain admin_level=8.


  FYI, it's the same with Minnesota: cities and townships are legally
 different forms of municipalities (one incorporated, one unincorporated).


 No, that’s a contradiction in terms. “unincorporated” basically means
 “outside of a municipality”.  Hence people talking about New Jersey being
 “fully incorporated” while Minnesota is not: Every place in NJ is part of a
 municipality.


  Minnesota also has unorganized areas, which are legally under the
 jurisdiction of the county, but which may have clusters of population that
 would warrant a place in OSM (call them what you will--village, hamlet
 whatever)


 Unsurprisingly, Wisconsin is similar.  place=hamlet is the thing to use for
 these, but it’s irrelevant to the admin_level as there is no administrative
 boundary for unincorporated communities.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area discusses both of these
 topics.



 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 tagg...@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Brad Neuhauser]

Aren't admin_level and place getting at slightly different things?
 admin_level is to mark official political/legal boundaries.  place is to
mark a...well...place that has a name, and the
place=city|town|village|hamlet does not necessarily align with the type of
government (if any) of the place.  From the place page:
In most Western countries, the status of a location (whether it is a
city/town/etc.), is decided by the government, and is not a function of
size. ***But most OSM communities of those countries have made a convention
to use the population to decide which place tag to use, to ensure a more
common way of tagging across the globe, and not to end up with cities of
1000 residents for example.***  Just like the term township that Ant
linked to, the same word can have different meanings in different contexts.

Brad

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 7:54 PM, Antony Pegg anttheli...@gmail.com wrote:

 ok, I got a question

 tagging admin area / populated centers / labels in USA seems to come down
 to two main tags:

 admin_level and place


 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Admin_level#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
 plus
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Place


 I've ran into a problem recently fixing up my area, where either the TIGER
 import, or inexperienced contributors have/are mis-tagging townships as
 being, in some way, more important / more visible than Cities or Towns.

 Before I go further, If you aren't sure exactly what a Township is in the
 US, please read this first:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Township_%28United_States%29

 In rural PA (Lancaster) I am specifically dealing with a buttload of these:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Township_%28United_States%29#Civil_townships

 From personal experience, the best I can equate them to is neighbourhoods
 or in-town areas in england.

 West Lampeter is to Lancaster as Tarpots is 918 years ago) to South
 Benfleet, or the Sea-front in Southend.

 The problem is that currently we dont have a discrete tag for
 place=township and all admin_level= are =8

 so, half a question, half a statement of intent, unless someone argues me
 down from the ledge...

 I'm going to start using place=suburb for townships as the closest
 comparison I can find
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dsuburb


 thx
 Ant

 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 tagg...@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

[Talk-us] US highway tagging (was: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap)

[Brad Neuhauser]

OK, a metaphorical gauntlet has been thrown down, and Richard makes great
points.  That said, is there any chance the US community can find some
agreement about highway tagging?  And once we do, we can broker the
Israel-Palestine peace talks. :)

But seriously, it seems like we need some sort of structured process for a
group to look at the options, find compromises, make a decision, and then
have a uniform scheme for US roads across the wiki (and hopefully the data
will follow...).  What has happened up to now with wiki proposals on
different pages and email discussions hasn't resolved the issue for whatever
reason.  Maybe the OSMF-US (or a working group, or some organizationally
smart person on this list) could come up with a process and timeline as a
way to focus the conversation and move to a resolution?

My $.02, Brad

-- Forwarded message --
From: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net
Date: Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
To: Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com
Cc: t...@openstreetmap.org


Kate Chapman wrote:

 Point 1: I'm not denying that the data in the U.S. is messed up.  On
 the other hand I can't count the number of times people say things
 that I summarize to 'God, why are you Americans too stupid, lazy or
 import crazy to map your own country?  It really makes people want to
 continue mapping with the project.


Understood absolutely.

But put that out of your mind. No matter how I or anyone else phrase it, no
matter whether it's accompanied by a helpful smile or a superior sneer, you
do genuinely need to sort this shit out anyway. You do need to make sure
that your data is as consistently attributed as Google's (or OSM's UK data),
because otherwise people, like Mr 41latitude, will compare the two to your
detriment.

And you need to do that for yourselves. With the awareness of being part of
an international project, sure, but it needs to come from US mappers. I
mean, I personally dislike the overuse of relations to model absolutely
everything, but you should take no bloody notice of me whatsoever and use
route relations for your roads if you think it works well and will be
reasonably in keeping with the rest of OSM.

So if, say, you think you need eight levels of importance within your
highway network, yet OSM only has seven (motorway, trunk, primary,
secondary, tertiary, unclassified, residential), screw it. Invent another
one. Quaternary or minor or something. The Germans have done that
(motorroad=yes) and no-one has died as a result.



 Yes it appears when people compare OSM to Google/Bing/etc they seem to
 start in the U.S.

Funnily enough only US people do that. :) Personally I'm more used to UK
cyclists comparing OSM and Google. Google has no cycle paths or routes. The
cyclists love OSM!

I think, actually, you have an advantage in that the US community is quite
small: it's easier to get agreement. Whereas over here, where the community
is big and fractious, it takes forever to get anything done. You're still
young. Use the advantage while you can.

cheers
Richard


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap

[Brad Neuhauser]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:

 For 1 - seriously, you do. In the UK we don't have some roads tagged
 A3400
 and others tagged A-3400 and others tagged CNSE (Chipping Norton
 Stratford Expressway, _obviously_): they're all tagged a la A3400. Our
 roads are coherently classified according to the UK highway system, even
 though it might seem counterintuitive (we tag non-primary A roads as
 highway=primary - well, so what). As a result our map looks lovely. If
 you
 get your shit together than your map will look lovely too.


  First we even have to agree on how it *should* be in the US.  There were
 some arguments on one of the lists, but like everything else, I don't think
 it's settled.   Now that we have relations, etc, the single agreed-on style
 can be applied later with a bot after we decide how they should be ref'd or
 named in the relation.


 Aside from labels, the main issue is what trunk/primary/secondary means in
the US, as we're trying to shoehorn the US system into the British schema.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms

[Brad Neuhauser]

If it's about NearMap, then talk-au seems more appropriate.

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
 On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
   this discussion must move to legal-talk.

 If we don't change the contributor terms, then we lose NearMap.

 That's not a legal discussion.

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] Address Standard

[Brad Neuhauser]

So, can we agree that in some areas the directionals *are* necessary
for display?  If not yet, in Minneapolis there are many more examples.
 To wit, there are four separate roads that are 3rd Ave, each with a
different directional: N, S, NE, SE.  For a little Where's Waldo fun,
see if you can find 'em all! (abbreviated, of course):
http://osm.org/go/t...@fd4yc5--

Cheers, Brad

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote:
 Do paper maps include the directional prefix or postfix?  I looked at a few
 maps of Washington DC and not one of them I saw include the quadrant suffix.
 I have a map of DC and it contains the quadrant suffixes.

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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Problems with names with postfixes / types

[Brad Neuhauser]

When I lived in Japan, almost all place names included the place type,
as specified on the Japan tagging page, both officially and in common
usage.  If you want to change this, I'd suggest first contacting some
of the Japanese OSMers.  If you remove it, it might actually make the
map look wrong from their perspective (ie--see this Yahoo Japan map
centered on Fukuoka City:
http://map.yahoo.co.jp/pl?type=scrolllat=33.60887995386457lon=130.37717309463633z=12mode=mappointer=ondatum=wgsfa=kshome=onhlat=33.654045269419hlon=130.45133080948layout=ei=utf-8p=fukuoka)

Also, (getting at the issue brought up in the ticket) Japanese users
might have some insight as to how Japanese language searches are
handled--not an easy thing!

Cheers,
Brad

On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote:
 Am 03.08.2010 17:24, schrieb Brian Quinion:

 Up till now it has been my opinion that all items entered with the the
 type in the name were in error

 That's my opinion, too. I'm nut sure if we should fix it in Japan using some
 automatism (eg. automatic generated osm files), because the problem has
 grown that big.

 Peter

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines

[Brad Neuhauser]

Regarding Matthew's earlier point (Agreed. There is no observation
that will tell you whether a road is more important than another road
that is not where you are. But you can identify physical
characteristics. A lot of these observations will lead to a coherent
whole.):  it seems like if you take this to its logical conclusion,
you're saying highways should just be tagged by physically observable
characteristics, and rendering should go off that and drop the
primary/secondary/tertiary etc?  But I think *maybe* we can all agree
that primary/secondary/tertiary are--or more accurately, could be
:)--a convenient shorthand for entering/viewing roads data and for
rendering.  It's a matter of what that shorthand is pointing to.
(plus, I personally have no interest in tagging lanes or speed limit
on roads, but maybe others do?)

Which brings us to the objective v. subjective question. Does our
shorthand point to an objective system that is always applied exactly
the same way in all situations?  The more I've worked with OSM and
data in general (especially at a statewide or national scale), the
more I've come to the conclusion that it is hard to get one size to
fit all.  I think if we could agree on a solution that is 95% perfect,
5% do-what-you-need-to-do-for-it-to-make-sense-in-your-area, that'd be
good enough for now, and far better than the confusion engendered by
conflicting schemes spread across the wiki.  Kevin's proposal seems to
be headed in that direction.

Cheers, Brad

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:40 AM, McGuire, Matthew
matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote:
 Can you show me an area of the US that's tagged completely objectively?

 For example: Interstate 99 near Altoona, PA is coded (AFAIK appropriately) a 
 motorway. Over the entire length of the Interstate, it looks like it serves a 
 max average daily traffic of 37,000 vehicles per day 
 (http://www.interstate-guide.com/i-099.html), which is equivalent to many 
 primary roads.

 Given this volume, it is reasonable to imagine Interstate 99 was never built. 
 Instead there is a four lane, at-grade highway. The road would still serve 
 the same interregional travel purpose in the area network. It could have the 
 same traffic volume. But it wouldn't be a motorway.

 Interstate 99 doesn't share other qualities of Interstates (traffic volume, 
 Interstate Travel, connecting large cities) Therefore, the current 
 classification of motorway is based on the physical quality of the road.

 I've also been on ridiculously under-designed two lane roads in the 
 Philadelphia and other Northeastern suburbs that carry large loads of 
 commuter traffic. They function as primary or secondary roads, but they 
 aren't built like the ones in my area and should not be classified the same 
 way. If they code it as such, it will only serve to alienate visitors.

 This is the North Bethlehem Pike north of Philadelphia. 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=12336821 It is coded as a primary road.

 This is Bass Lake Road west of Minneapolis. 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=41442915 It is coded as secondary.

 I'll let you dig up what the roads look like with whatever tools you're 
 comfortable with. But the way it looks to me is that functionally, they are 
 probably both accurate. Physically, the secondary road is a much more robust 
 road.

 These differences are reflective of regional differences, and I did not need 
 to spend much time looking for them. If they are all coded by relative local 
 function, we whitewash regional differences - the interesting (useful, if 
 that's a requirement) bits to me.



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


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

Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines

[Brad Neuhauser]

I think that's pretty much covered here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Functional_Classification_System

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Carl Anderson
carl.ander...@vadose.org wrote:
 WRT US Highway classifications

 You may want to take a look at the National Highway Planning Network.
 http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_atlas_database/2010/zip/nhpn.zip


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Placing a node at a known latitude/longitude

[Brad Neuhauser]

If you're not advanced enough to handle the four step process, L in
Potlatch tells you the lat/long of the current cursor position, so you
might be able to get pretty close.  Cheers, Brad

On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 Hi,

 John F. Eldredge wrote:

 If you know the latitude and longitude of where you would like to
 create a POI in Potlatch, but can't locate the exact position in the
 Yahoo aerial view (due to tree cover), how can you create a POI at
 that known latitude and longitude?

 Step 1 - install proper editor (JOSM)
 Step 2 - select add node from Tools menu, or press Shift-D
 Step 3 - enter coordinates
 Step 4 - upload

 SCNR
 Frederik

 --
 Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tag name vs operator

[Brad Neuhauser]

I've been using the operator tag for library branches (where name is
the branch name, and operator is the library system).  Same could be
done with schools within a school district.  Does this seem like a
reasonable use for the operator tag?

Side note: John, Do you seriously check health certificates before
tagging restaurants?

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 3:40 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 13 July 2010 06:25, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
 Then now the question : how can we determin if we use 'name' or 'operator'
 if it is one or the other ? e.g. restaurants or hotel might or might not be
 part of a chain, thus might be tagged with 'name' or 'operator'. Shall know
 the door to ask ?

 name v operator is simple for restaurants in western countries since
 the official business name=* will be on the health certificate issued
 by what ever government department is in charge of public health and
 safety. Where as the operator=* tag is usually on the sign board out
 the front the restaurant... Obviously other places of business will
 have official name=* but the business certificate probably wouldn't
 need to be on display like health certifications...

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!

[Brad Neuhauser]

From mapquest's blog post [1]:

AOL also announced today, a $1 million open-source mapping investment
fund.  This fund will support the growth of open-source mapping in the
United States in the local communities that Patch.com covers.  More
information about the AOL grant application process is available by
emailing o...@mapquest.com.

Looks like Patch.com only currently operates in parts of 5 NE states
and California, but the Mapquest post also put in a plug for mapping
parties, so who knows.

There's a slightly more techy post from mapquest too, if anyone's
interested [2]

[1] http://blog.mapquest.com/2010/07/09/mapquest-opens-up/
[2] http://devblog.mapquest.com/2010/07/09/mapquest-opens-up-uk/


On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:05 PM, jeremy jozwik jerjoz.for...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Nakor nakor@gmail.com wrote:
  FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US
 SOTM?

 Mapquest is also planning to spent $1mill to improve OSM data in the US:

 any info on how they plan on spending the 1 mil?

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


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

Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] Canadian International Boundary Offshore Limit

[Brad Neuhauser]

This might be helpful regarding arctic boundaries/claims:
http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/resources/arctic/

Brad

On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Sam Vekemans
acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi all,

 I'm just thinking about that mega Oil Spill that happened, and the Canadian
 concerns

 http://www.timescolonist.com/news/slick+disaster+triggers+alarm+bells+Canada/3005357/story.html

 One of the things im working on is mapping the National Protected areas and
 aborigional lands, were some are off-shore.
 The Atlas of Canada. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Atlas_of_Canada is
 currently the only source for this boundary info (that i know of), so it's
 good to map it.
 .. as it show what (canada thinks is this off-shore limit border)

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/58720651

 Rweait noted that most countries just show the 12nm limit.  ... however...
 the world doesnt always get along :-)

 Because there is this Endeavour Hydrothermal Vents Marine Protected area
 (rectangle) exists  it's way outside this limit.
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/54601371

 So it would be interesting to see if others can find sources for the US
 international waters...  and actually map out there these ecological
 reserves are that have been damaged.  (in the gulf  of mexico) ..
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8651333.stm

 as well as all the ecological reserves out in the pacific  what the US
 thinks is the border limits

 But perhaps even more importantly is the mega drilling off Alaska / Canada
 coast.  So showing these boarders will help people at least put it into
 context.   As it's never clear where these dilling areas are planned.
 (since maps are never available)
 http://www.pacificenvironment.org/article.php?id=3276


 Anyway, I'll wait until this gets rendered (at the different zoom levels),
 then wait a little more after that so to get feedback.   Then continue
 drawing this border in a few weeks.

 Cheers,
 Sam

 Twitter: @Acrosscanada
 Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/
 http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
 Skype: samvekemans
 OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
 @Acrosscanadatrails

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



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

Re: [Talk-us] Canadian International Boundary Offshore Limit

[Brad Neuhauser]

This might be helpful regarding arctic boundaries/claims:
http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/resources/arctic/

Brad

On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Sam Vekemans
acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi all,

 I'm just thinking about that mega Oil Spill that happened, and the Canadian
 concerns

 http://www.timescolonist.com/news/slick+disaster+triggers+alarm+bells+Canada/3005357/story.html

 One of the things im working on is mapping the National Protected areas and
 aborigional lands, were some are off-shore.
 The Atlas of Canada. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Atlas_of_Canada is
 currently the only source for this boundary info (that i know of), so it's
 good to map it.
 .. as it show what (canada thinks is this off-shore limit border)

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/58720651

 Rweait noted that most countries just show the 12nm limit.  ... however...
 the world doesnt always get along :-)

 Because there is this Endeavour Hydrothermal Vents Marine Protected area
 (rectangle) exists  it's way outside this limit.
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/54601371

 So it would be interesting to see if others can find sources for the US
 international waters...  and actually map out there these ecological
 reserves are that have been damaged.  (in the gulf  of mexico) ..
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8651333.stm

 as well as all the ecological reserves out in the pacific  what the US
 thinks is the border limits

 But perhaps even more importantly is the mega drilling off Alaska / Canada
 coast.  So showing these boarders will help people at least put it into
 context.   As it's never clear where these dilling areas are planned.
 (since maps are never available)
 http://www.pacificenvironment.org/article.php?id=3276


 Anyway, I'll wait until this gets rendered (at the different zoom levels),
 then wait a little more after that so to get feedback.   Then continue
 drawing this border in a few weeks.

 Cheers,
 Sam

 Twitter: @Acrosscanada
 Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/
 http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
 Skype: samvekemans
 OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
 @Acrosscanadatrails

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



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

Re: [Talk-us] Admin boundaries tied to roads

[Brad Neuhauser]

I'd agree with Brett on the boundaries.  The Census data is not
perfect by any means, but it's pretty good, at least in my
area--Minnesota.  (and orders of magnitude better than it was in
2000!)  And if it's not good in your area, you should talk to your
local government and make sure they're participating in the Census'
yearly Boundary  Annexation Survey.
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/bas/bashome.html

I can tell for sure that they are completely wrong in California. They are not 
even close to USGS 24k, don't align with official county borders from official 
sources and don't align with natural features, fences which are sometimes 
visible on Yahoo.

To further respond to this, there is no claim by the Census that it's
survey accuracy, or that it aligns with other data.  Fundamentally, it
is created by the Census for internal purposes, and all TIGER boundary
data is relative to the other TIGER data. (just like a lot of traced
OSM data is relative to the Yahoo imagery)  Everybody gets access to
it for free and you can use it when its good or ignore it when its bad
or modify it when its in between.  The bigger issue with it being
imported into OSM is the currency, because municipal boundaries are
always changing, and as has been mentioned, boundaries are not usually
something that is easily verifiable on the ground

Cheers,
Brad

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Lord-Castillo, Brett
blord-casti...@stlouisco.com wrote:






 -Original Message-
 From: Apollinaris Schoell [mailto:ascho...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 9:47 AM
 To: Lord-Castillo, Brett
 Cc: 'talk-us@openstreetmap.org'
 Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Admin boundaries tied to roads


 On 23 Apr 2010, at 7:13 , Lord-Castillo, Brett wrote:

 On 19 Apr 2010, at 20:24, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
 On 19 Apr 2010, at 20:07 , Alan Mintz wrote:
 Not to mention that merging them will result in the inability to hide 
 these
 boundaries. When doing a bunch of editing on a road that follows one, in
 the past, I've taken the time to verify that the boundary doesn't share 
 any
 nodes with anything and then remove it from my local OSM file manually so 
 I
 don't have to constantly deal with it. If it shares nodes with anything
 else, this is no longer possible.

 fully agree, the good thing is these boundaries are tiger data and bad 
 data anyway and should be replaced with better boundaries

 While I understand the mantra of TIGER=Bad because of the state of the road 
 data, this is not true for the boundary data. Most of the
 boundary data comes directly from recorded surveys (something not available 
 for roads) and is not bad data for most of the United
 States. The rural areas would be the one exception (mostly because they did 
 not have surveys converted to digital layers in 2000), but
  rural areas are also highly likely to have realigned boundary roads that 
 no longer correspond to the original boundaries.

 I can tell for sure that they are completely wrong in California. They are 
 not even close to USGS 24k, don't align with official county
 borders from official sources and don't align with natural features, fences 
 which are sometimes visible on Yahoo.


 Yes, California is one of the well-known exceptions. Their LUCA program fell 
 apart (and this time around has been split into two separate regions as a 
 result). If you take the Midwest states though, like Iowa, Minnesota, 
 Missouri with their 300+ counties between them, the TIGER lines are directly 
 from official sources, especially the 2009 updates.

 Brett Lord-Castillo
 Information Systems Designer/GIS Programmer
 St. Louis County Police
 Office of Emergency Management
 14847 Ladue Bluffs Crossing Drive
 Chesterfield, MO 63017
 Office: 314-628-5400 Fax: 314-628-5508 Direct: 314-628-5407

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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying Interstate Relations

[Brad Neuhauser]

Paul, I believe this is what you said on another thread.  Have you tried it yet?

You can contact the person through the website (change your name in the
URL when you look at your profile with the person you're trying to
contact).

I'm also pretty sure NE2 is on talk-us.  See the thread proposed
first principles for United States road tagging

Regards,
Brad

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
 On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:58:38 -0500, Chris Hunter wrote:

 Last night, user NE2 cleaned up the interstate system by merging all
 of the states with 2 relations per interstate back into 1 relation with
 direction-based roles.  I've already requested a roll-back on the area I
 was working on, but I wanted to check if we still have a consensus on
 splitting each interstate into separate directions at the state line.

 NE2 has been making a number of questionable edits in the northwest
 Oregon area recently; I wonder if it's possible to smack 'em upside the
 head with a clue-by-four somehow...


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


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

Re: [Talk-us] proposed first principles for United States road tagging

[Brad Neuhauser]

So, aside from interstates (which it seems like everyone agrees should
be tagged as motorways?), should/could System be abstracted out of
road tagging definitions?

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 4 Mar 2010, at 9:38 , McGuire, Matthew wrote:

 I see three dimensions of road classification at play here.

 1) System
 2) Function
 3) Observed Character

 System is the easy one. That is the road system(s) that that the road 
 belongs to especially for signage, but also for road funding channels, and 
 maintenance responsibility.  And I agree that in practice, Census Feature 
 Class Codes have been used (incorrectly) to identify the system to which a 
 road belongs.


 exactly, we should start tagging this with an operator tag or something 
 similar. many  osm mappers don't care but road enthusiasts do.

 Function describes the role a road plays in a road system and the types of 
 trips (volume and length) it supports based on travel demand and trip 
 generation. This is what the Highway Functional Classification System is 
 designed for. It is used by Metropolitan Planning Organizations to 
 distribute transportation funding.

 A road's Observed Character is what kind of road it appears to be to a 
 person on the road. For general purpose maps, using observed character to 
 classify the roads intends to match a person expectations to what they see 
 on the ground. Character is highly correlated with function, but is not the 
 same.

 I think Observed Character is what OSM is trying to achieve with the highway 
 tag. I think this because the OSM tag descriptions for highways have photos 
 and describe how the road looks, and you cannot determine system or function 
 from a photograph.  I also think it is what the Census Feature Class Code 
 definitions describe.


 2,3 define what a navi or routing engine should use for best/fastest route 
 and there is a wide agreement in many countries that this is how the highway 
 tag should be used. no hard rule defined by either one. also local and 
 relative importance of a road plays a role. In a city a 2-3 lane road might 
 be tertiary but out in the country a primary road may have one lane in each 
 direction.

 good old discussion on this topic
 http://www.mail-archive.com/talk-us@openstreetmap.org/msg00594.html


 I would like to see all three dimensions.

 Matt



 -Original Message-
 From: David ``Smith'' [mailto:vidthe...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 9:33 AM
 To: McGuire, Matthew
 Cc: Nathan Edgars II; talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Talk-us] proposed first principles for United States road 
 tagging

 On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 10:45 AM, McGuire, Matthew
 matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us wrote:
 The US Census Feature Class Code has descriptions of most types types of 
 roads.
 This would at least tie it to an existing US standard.

 http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/appendxe.asc

 This designation exists in many OSM roads tagged with TIGER:CFCC. However 
 most roads could definitely use some refinement. We could strip the TIGER 
 from the tag to just cfcc then refine it from there.

 The original TIGER import did in fact use CFCCs to determine highway
 class.  It produced values of motorway, motorway_link, primary,
 secondary, and residential.  We've been refining that for 3 years now.
 The problem is, this comes from the Census Bureau.  They really don't
 care about a road's functional importance.  There are CFCCs for many
 other things besides roads.  And the few CFCCs assigned for road
 features are essentially based on whether the road is an Interstate, a
 US route, or a State Route, which doesn't correlate well with a road's
 functional classification.

 What's more useful is the Highway Functional Classification System.
 The name sounds like what we want to do.  And it's from the Federal
 Highway Administration, so they actually care about roads.  I've also
 put forward guidelines for translating HFCS to OSM.
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_roads_tagging#Discussion
 (Sort of buried in a wall of text.  I should probably repost those
 guidelines in my userspace.)

 --
 David Smith
 a.k.a. Vid the Kid
 a.k.a. Bír'd'in

 Does this font make me look fat?
 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


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


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

Re: [Talk-us] Fw: script for adding layer=1 to bridges

[Brad Neuhauser]

The keepright checker http://keepright.ipax.at/ shows layer
conflicts (amongst other things), if you want to clean up an area.

Brad

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
 On 1/27/10 9:50 AM, Chris Hunter wrote:
 Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Hunterchunter...@gmail.com
 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:49:46
 To: Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org
 Subject: Re: [Talk-us] script for adding layer=1 to bridges

 I agree with Fredrick that this comes perilously close to tagging for the 
 renderer, but you're correct that there should be layer=* tags on all 
 bridges.

 I think the best way to handle this would be to have the script open an 
 openstreetbugs ticket for each untagged bridge.

 i concur. there is too much variation in the tagging/non-tagging of
 bridges right now for arbitrarily adding
 layer=1 to be safe.

 richard


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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Haiti Field requirement: Haiti OSM maps in PDF

[Brad Neuhauser]

In case you haven't seen these, the folks at Delta State University
have been making PDFs with the MGRS grid of much of the main
earthquake zone (and using some OSM data)--see them here:
http://edcftp.cr.usgs.gov/pub/data/disaster/201001_Earthquake_Haiti/data/map_products/MISSISSIPPI_DELTA_STATE_MAPS/
 (esp. see the Haiti_6Kscale_8511A4size_Geopdfimage_Atlas_vDSU20100123
series)

They've been using ESRI products to produce the maps, but it would
probably be worthwhile to talk to them if you want to do something
similar.  The Director there is Talbot Brooks. tbro...@deltastate.edu

Brad

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Andy Gates an...@ravenfamily.org wrote:
 Just picking up on this, the chatter I've heard suggests that it would be
 *very* helpful to overlay printed maps with the NATO MGRS grid.

 (MapOSMatic generates its own arbitrary grid: pretty, but not as useful in
 this situation.)

 @spara came up with this tidy lat/long and MGRS location finder, so the
 code is out there: http://haiti.crisiscommons.org/location/

 Has anyone got further with a clean printable style?

   -andyg


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


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