Re: [OSM-talk] Is OpenAerialMap service dead?

[Peter Miller]

On 12 Jun 2009, at 14:19, Stefan de Konink wrote:

> Peter Miller wrote:
>> What resources would be required to 'do it right'? Is it worth  
>> doing  that? Are there a group of people who want to do so?
>
> We are currently under the flag of openstreetphoto flying with  
> Mikrokopters and Canon camera's to maken new aerial photography  
> released under CC-BY-SA for non-paying people, and CC-BY for people  
> that want to compensate for hardware and invested time.
>
> A WMS is being setup to store the material, because I don't want  
> those photo's to end up in our 'default' PoI photo layer.

Great stuff. Is it planned that this can be used as a DB of aerial  
photography from other sources such as private planes or authorities  
(just so  long as the photography is released on a suitable license)?

Also - Is OpenStreetPhoto going to be usable for storage of ground  
level photos of junctions, bridges etc which can be useful for photo  
route planning or not. The name you have used would lead me to expect  
that it would, however the project description seems to focus on  
aerial photography. Would this be a possible extension of the project?




Regards,



Peter


>
>
>
>
> Stefan


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Traffic lights

[Peter Miller]

On 13 Jun 2009, at 08:44, Shaun McDonald wrote:

> I just put the traffic lights on the nodes. Life is too short to spend
> time grouping them. There is too much Tiger fixup and unnamed, or
> completely missing roads to enter. If the junction is large, you'll
> probably have a longer than normal waiting time, thus it shouldn't be
> a problem if you go through an extra set in the model.

It certainly makes sense to me to add a traffic signal tag to the  
'junction' relation. There was a discussion some time ago on this  
subject which also concluded that there should be provision for a tag  
for the actual signal head.

Personally I would suggest that we add a traffic_signals=yes to the  
'junction' relation and create a new point feature tagged  
'highway=signal-head' for the actual poles. I guess that someone at  
some point will ask for 'highway=signal-loop' for indicating where the  
triggering loop is as well.

Finally, is the term 'Intersection' a useful one for complex junctions  
of this sort to distinguish it from a single T junction or cross-road?  
The term Junction would always then relate to a single node, and the  
term Intersection would refer to a relation which combines a number of  
nodes/ways. The simplest Intersection would be a staggered junction,  
but spaghetti junction in B'ham would also be an intersection.



Regards,




Peter



>
>
> Shaun
>
> On 13 Jun 2009, at 02:27, SteveC wrote:
>
>> So there are bits and pieces on traffic lights on the wiki
>>
>>  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Traffic_Lights
>>  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals
>>  
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Set_of_Traffic_Signals
>>
>> but seems to have gone quiet especially on the question of modelling
>> traffic lights across big junctions. I'm interested because all the
>> lights near me span 4 or more intersecting ways. I'm in the relation
>> camp on how we should model that rather than the way joining it all  
>> up
>> with amenity:traffic_signals on it. Anyone interested in taking
>> charge?
>>
>> Best
>>
>> 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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Traffic lights

[Peter Miller]

On 13 Jun 2009, at 16:36, Cartinus wrote:

> On Saturday 13 June 2009 16:34:48 Polderrunner wrote:
>> I'm also in the
>> "life-is-too-short-for-complex-mapping-of-traffic-lights" camp.  
>> However,
>> to provide routers etc with a realistic view of the intersection I  
>> put
>> the 'outer' traffic lights at their real position before the junction
>> nodes (and also before any crossing cycleways). I don't put any
>> 'interior' traffic lights. Example:
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.04246&lon=4.32104&zoom=17&layers=0B00F
>> TF
>>
>> A router will only see one traffic light whatever direction is chosen
>> through the intersection. This would be realistic for most  
>> intersections
>> having synchronized signals. And the extra effort is minimal.
>
> I've thought of doing it this way too for intersections of two dual
> carriageways. With two intersecting single carriageways I'd put the  
> traffic
> lights in the single intersection node.

With this approach you are effectively encoding the stop line  
associated with the traffic signal into the model which is certainly  
an approach however the renderer is still going to want to know about  
junctions and dual carriageways in due course for better rendering a  
lower zoom levels.

I am not convinced by the 'I haven't got time' argument. In your  
example one could probably encode it using the junction relation in  
about as much time as adding the four nodes and there is more benefit  
from doing that in the longer term by providing the higher level model  
of the junction (ie "these roads here are part of a junction, there  
are four dual carriageways approaching it and it is traffic signal  
controlled so feel free to render it as a four single ways coming to a  
single node if that is what you prefer").

Regards,




Peter


>
>
> The problem I have is, that I don't know of a way to avoid "passing"  
> an extra
> traffic light for intersections of a single and a dual carriageway.  
> Does
> anyone know a solution for that?
>
>
> -- 
> m.v.g.,
> Cartinus
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

[OSM-talk] OpenGolfMap? - was OpenPisteMap

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Jul 2009, at 17:32, Steve Hill wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Hurricane McEwen wrote:
>
>> I just went to visit openpistemap.org and I get a blank map. Anyone  
>> run
>> in to the same issue?
>
> Errm.. yes, damn.  :(

Any chance of opengolfmap? I am needing a map to show the interaction  
between an existing golf course and a proposed cycle route. I can add  
the data to the map but I am not aware of anything that will render it.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Golf_course


Regards,




Peter


>
> I am using the OpenLayers code hosted on the OSM servers - looks  
> like this
> has changed and it is now breaking.  I'll try and have a go at  
> fixing it
> tomorrow.
>
>  - Steve
>xmpp:st...@nexusuk.org   sip:st...@nexusuk.org   http://www.nexusuk.org/
>
>  Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence
>
>
> ___
> 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] OpenGolfMap? - was OpenPisteMap

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Jul 2009, at 21:19, si...@mungewell.org wrote:

>
>>
>> Any chance of opengolfmap? I am needing a map to show the interaction
>> between an existing golf course and a proposed cycle route. I can add
>> the data to the map but I am not aware of anything that will render  
>> it.
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Golf_course
>>
>
> You can use OpenLayers to placed additional items (icons, ways,  
> bitmaps,
> etc) on top of a Tile-Server based map, meaning that you don't need to
> render special tiles.
>
> If the cycle route and/or golf course interaction is quite simple  
> you can
> generate these as seperate OSM 'xml' files and (effectively) render  
> in the
> browser.
>
> This has the advantage of not 'polluting' the OSM database with stuff
> which is (not yet) real.
>
> A very simple example(s) is here:
> http://www.mungewell.org/osm/osm.html
> http://www.cossfest.ca/osm_coast_plaza/osm_coast_plaza.html

Or, of course if the 'holes' are bound up with a relation for all the  
features of the golf course then the relation can be overlaid on the  
standard mapnik tiles. Also, I don't think it is fair to call it  
'polluting the map' to add current details just because there is no  
rendering . Tagging normally takes place ahead of rendering or there  
would be nothing to render!

Out of interest, is there a way of overlaying KML on OSM tiles using  
OL as there is with google maps if one points the search box to a KML  
file?


Thanks for the response.



Regards,


Pete

>
> Cheers
> Mungewell.
>
>


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenGolfMap? - was OpenPisteMap

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Jul 2009, at 00:11, Richard Weait wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 19:02 +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
>> Any chance of opengolfmap? I am needing a map to show the interaction
>> between an existing golf course and a proposed cycle route. I can add
>> the data to the map but I am not aware of anything that will render  
>> it.
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Golf_course
>
> The discussion page for that proposed feature links to this golf  
> course
> on OSM.

I hadn't notices the discussion page. Thank for that. Very useful.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=10.9112&lon=77.02036&zoom=17&layers=0B00FTF
>
> I think osmarender and Mapnik do a fair job of the rendering.

The result is fine, however the tagging is pretty dirty - using  
'natural=beach' for a bunker is fine to illustrate a point - which is  
what it is for - but is clearly not suitable for general practice. I  
will use the proposed tagging of golf=bunker and wait for the  
rendering to catch up!


Regards,


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: [OSM-talk] Undo request button for changesets

[Peter Miller]

On 16 Jul 2009, at 13:48, Sam Vekemans wrote:


Hi all,
+1 for having a revert button only for your own (personal) changsets.
With no button requesting a change revert. .. just message that  
person, in a friendly way.

Most of the time it's a newbie who is just learning. :-)


Umm..  Not everyone is that friendly and we need more powerful  
medicine for those occasions.


We have a persistent and very destructive mapper in the UK. We have  
reverted most of his edits from June by hand. I messaged him politely  
in June without a response. He reappeared in July and is now breaking  
roads, rivers and railways and adding stray bits of visible rubbish  
most days. All  of this stuff is majorly destructive:-

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/liam123/edits


I think we need a number of things pretty fast.

1) A way to view quickly determine the nature of any change-set - did  
the change set add any new ways/nodes? did it add tags to ways/nodes?  
change values in tags?  delete ways/node? delete tags? - that sort of  
stuff.  I would like to see all the changes textually and also as a  
map and be able to see the history of each feature with similar  
information available.
2) A way to for people to patrol for edits by new contributors in an  
area on a real-time basis and a way for experienced mappers to  
indicate that a newbie's changesets has been checked and are ok or not.
3) An RSS feed to monitor a users edits to watch for new activity. Got  
it, we have that one - thanks
4) A way to revert a change-sets quickly before people put stuff on  
top or try to repair (I would also like to opportunities to complete  
the revert even if work has subsequently been done on some of the  
touched features)
5) A way to see which change-sets have been reverted recently within  
an area and by whom

6) A way to revert the revert etc
7) A way for people spot revert wars (ie users doing many reverts or  
areas with many reverts)
8) Community guidelines on only using revert for blatant vandalism  
rather than just because you preferred it as is was - (assume food  
intentions and build if in doubt)
9) A way to request a block on the IP address for a short period if  
vandalism is coming from  unique static IP address
10) I would also like a publicly available talk page for a user where  
people can leave public messages for the user and for other people to  
read. This would need to be a wiki page so problems could be removed,  
but it would allow a place to talk in semi-public about issues which  
is sometimes useful.


I think all of the above is the what we need to have to make it work  
from a community perspective as well as from a technical perspective.


Do be aware that a vandal is very unlikely to sign the new license so  
at present it is important that we remove the edits rather than repair  
on top of edits.





Regards,



Peter Miller




(If we had a "revert" button next to a changeset, and I agree with the
cautious voices who said that this is quite unlikely to work once a  
few
hours or days have passed, then I would probably enable that button  
only

for the user who committed the original change, and anyone else who
clicks the button would just send a message to that user saying  
"please

revert your change".)

Bye
Frederik

From my experience, the user who did the upload. .. ie, if i  
uploaded something that i realize that more nodes were added than  
needed.  Having an easy way for me to fix that is helpful.
I found that once i notified users of what was done, they  
(themselves) would probably appreciate the ability for them to  
revert their mistake (since now becoming aware of it).   ie. in the  
case of copyright maps.


For example, im now fixing up some of the stuff i added for my  
sample area.  My changesets are in a logical order.  So i'd like the  
ability to be able to 'undo', something i did last week.
So if other edits where made ontop of some of the changes, a list  
can be made available of those conflicts. But all the other stuff  
(breadcrumbs) can be reverted.  (some of my polygons might have  
extra nodes, that i dont know of yet)


Cheers,
Sam
___
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-legal-talk] ABC Street Atlas

[Peter Miller]

On 16 Jul 2009, at 20:11, Ed Avis wrote:

>  is a scan  
> of the
> London 'ABC Street Atlas' from 1933/34.  It is suggested on the OSM  
> wiki as
> a data source; is it judged okay to copy information such as street  
> names and
> layout from this atlas into OSM?

ianal, however a lawyer told me that copyright for maps is complex. I  
understand that crown copyright has a simple cut of date but that for  
other works is can be hard to determine. As such, if the map is  not  
crown copyright then it may be best not to use it as a source.

Curious that the people who put it on the web claim copyright?



Regards,



Peter



>
> -- 
> Ed Avis 
>
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ABC Street Atlas

[Peter Miller]

On 16 Jul 2009, at 20:11, Ed Avis wrote:

>  is a scan  
> of the
> London 'ABC Street Atlas' from 1933/34.  It is suggested on the OSM  
> wiki as
> a data source; is it judged okay to copy information such as street  
> names and
> layout from this atlas into OSM?

To follow from my previous email, it might be worth getting a bit more  
information and getting a more definitive answer. Do you know who  
published the atlas and who's data it was base on?


Regards,



Peter

>
> -- 
> Ed Avis 
>
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


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

[OSM-talk] Broken formatting of Wiki pages

[Peter Miller]

Many of the UK wiki pages with 'place' and 'slippery map' templates  
are badly formatted, but not all.


This one is badly formatted:-
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Sussex

and this one as well:-
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/County_Durham

But this one is fine:-
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cambridgeshire



Any ideas?



Peter Miller


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Local Chapters Meeting Minutes WAS Re: Status of the Local Chapter working group

[Peter Miller]

On 18 Aug 2009, at 09:17, Nick Black wrote:


John,

I said:
 so if you can't make it but would like to, please add your name to  
the wiki so we can have a second call at a better time.


No-one is trying to exclude you - especially not the people who are  
trying set up local groups and make OSM and the OSM-F more  
inclusive :-)  If there are people who want to take the call at a  
Australia/Asia/New Zealand friendly time, I've said that I'll go out  
of my way to make it and I'm sure some of the other Local Chapters  
volunteers will as well.


Please add your details to the wiki page, suggest some friendly  
times and we'll set up a call.  Alternatively, organize the call  
yourself at any time you want and give you feedback to the Local  
Chapters group lo...@osmfoundation.org.


Would a 'local chapters' email list not be a great way to include  
people from all around the world on different time zones for to  
include those for whom English is a second language? A combination of  
email list and wiki allow people to work at a time of there  
convenience, gives people time to read and write at their own speed  
(using translation tools if necessary) and there is a full history of  
the discussion.


I suggest that conference calls and IRC are only used for those issues  
where email is not working or getting to an resolution on a difficult  
subject.


Regards,



Peter



--
Nick


On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 6:40 AM, John Smith  
 wrote:

--- On Tue, 18/8/09, Nick Black  wrote:

> Chapters meetings.  You can find minutes here [1] along
> with information about the next meeting.

There seems to be more questions posed than answers in the minutes...

> The next meeting is proposed for the 24th August
> at 18.00 - 19:30 BST.  I know this is not great for a lot
> of people who are in non-BST friendly time zones, so if you
> can't make it but would like to, please add your name to
> the wiki so we can have a second call at a better
> time.

I did, but it didn't seem to make a difference, also there is at  
least one other person that would like to have been in the  
conference but wasn't an insomniac last night either.


> One of the goals of the meeting next week will
> be to set a timetable for getting local chapters set up,
> which will be largely dependent on how much we all agree /
> disagree in the call.  Until then, please read over the
> Local Chapters wiki page and add as many comments or ideas
> as possible, so we can discuss next week.

It's a bit exclusionary to state that and then already acknowledge  
that people can't make it due to time of day.







--
--
Nick Black
twitter.com/nick_b
___
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] [Spam] Revert a changeset

[Peter Miller]

On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:57, Teemu Koskinen wrote:

> Could somebody please revert this changeset:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2168210
>
> The moving of the nodes across the Atlantic is obviously wrong.

Do check out this page for guidance and the email address for requests  
to the data working group.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism

Note that I have been working on this page today and have added a  
section for 'speedy response' in cases where a failure to respond  
within hours could lead to highly visible damage to the rendered maps  
or changes in sensitive areas (for example Washington - particularly  
sensitive given the support and visibility given to OSM by the  
Whitehouse).

Personally I think we need a huge effort to be ready for damaging  
vandalism and much better tools to spot potential errors in a much  
more sophisticated way.


Regards,




Peter



>
> Regards Teemu Koskinen
>
> ___
> 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] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - miniature railway

[Peter Miller]

On 18 Aug 2009, at 17:47, Peter Childs wrote:

> 2009/8/16 John Smith :
>> --- On Sun, 16/8/09, Lester Caine  wrote:
>>> I'd recommend synchronising this with wikipedia
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_railway
>>>
>>> A lot of work has been done there between the various types
>>> of model/miniature
>>> railway, and that page has a fairly comprehensive list of
>>> 'ridable' miniature
>>> railways. Separate form narrow gauge which tend to be 'full
>>> size'
>>
>> Some of those border on light rail or narrow gauge, looking at some  
>> of the photos it looks like regular railway track.
>>
>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Bure_Valley_Railway_DSC00533.jpg
>>
>> Compared to something like this:
>>
>> http://scrms.org.au/files/IMGP5229.JPG
>>
>>
>
> Looking at this (and I know of two "Miniture Railways" one is 9"
> (Strood, Gillingham, Kent, Uk) and the other 3.5/5.5" (Mote Park,
> Maidstone, Kent, Uk)
>
> Tagging Railway=miniture makes sence (in both cases) but they are
> quite different animals.
>
> I think we should tag the Gauge (Possibly in all cases) and assume
> Standard Railway Gauge if not tagged.
>
> I think a Gauge=width (in mm I guess) is worth adding.
>

Do check out the  recent comments on the railways wiki page re gauge
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Railways


Regards,



Peter




> 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: [OSM-talk] Revert a changeset

[Peter Miller]

On 18 Aug 2009, at 20:08, Teemu Koskinen wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:48:03 +0300, andrzej zaborowski  > wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/18 Peter Miller :
>>> On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:57, Teemu Koskinen wrote:
>>>> Could somebody please revert this changeset:
>>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2168210
>>>>
>>>> The moving of the nodes across the Atlantic is obviously wrong.
>>>
>>> Do check out this page for guidance and the email address for  
>>> requests
>>> to the data working group.
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
>>>
>
> I don't think this case was deliberate vandalism, other edits from  
> the user seems to be good.

An important distinction. The vandalism page does already make the  
distinction but no one is disputing the need to revert such a change- 
set.
>
>>> Note that I have been working on this page today and have added a
>>> section for 'speedy response' in cases where a failure to respond
>>> within hours could lead to highly visible damage to the rendered  
>>> maps
>>> or changes in sensitive areas (for example Washington - particularly
>>> sensitive given the support and visibility given to OSM by the
>>> Whitehouse).
>>
>> Note that most incorrect edits spanning more than a few nodes need a
>> speedy response because soon people start making edits on top of the
>> unwanted changeset and reverting it becomes more difficult.
>>
>
> What we need, as has been previously discussed on the list, is a  
> similar mechanism that wikipedia has that will revert an edit  
> easily, maybe even from the website ui.

Agreed. It is worth noting that a lot of the anti-vandalism tools and  
general data improvement tools for Wikipedia have been developed and  
are made available independently from the main project. Undo is core  
to the Wikipedia project and I think we need such a button to revert a  
change-set in the UI. I would support the inclusion of undo and  
rollback into the general toolset, but possibly have the feature only  
available to 'established' users, ie ones who have made >x edits over  
 >y days. Wikipedia has some functions, such as image upload and edits  
to much-vandalised pages, that are limited to 'established' users.  
Possibly it is the same concept and definition of being 'established'   
that makes one eligible to vote at the AGM.

>
>> Since I had the setup for this ready, I reverted the changeset  
>> 2168210
>> in my changeset
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2192016
>> but I had to make a couple of edits before uploading it:
>>
>> * xybot had helpfully made an edit on top of some of the nodes
>> removing a spurious tag and causing conflicts.
>> * I did not revert the creation of node 469327157 (a parking) which
>> seems genuine.
>> * Something really strange: node
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/270798013/history is edited
>> two times inside the same changesets and revert.pl didn't deal
>> correctly with this.
>>
>
> There still seems to be some problem, the way 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/39175980 
>  still goes across the Atlantic, but it looks different than before.
>
>
>>>
>>> Personally I think we need a huge effort to be ready for damaging
>>> vandalism and much better tools to spot potential errors in a much
>>> more sophisticated way.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>
> I spotted this with the Geofabriks OSM Inspector, but that's still a  
> bit too slow to update, it would be much better if it updated at  
> least hourly or even from the minute diffs.
>
> The revert tools should also be made to look what exactly was  
> modified in the changeset. Eg. if a node was moved, but tags were  
> left untouched, and after that someone else modified only the tags  
> but didn't move the node, reverting the first change should only  
> move the node back to it's original position and not change the tags  
> back as those were changed by someone else.

Agreed - I see no reason why people can't write tools that use the  
minutely diffs and monitor for edits by people not on a 'white list',  
that are possible block shifts of many nodes, that have text fields  
that contain dubious content, that have very long ways, that include  
un-tagged ways (santa-trails), name changes for well established  
features (ie roads that have been called 'High Street' for 2 years and  
suddenly become something else, broken areas etc etc.


Regards,



Peter


>
>
> Teemu Koskinen


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

[OSM-talk] Local Chapters Working Group Update

[Peter Miller]

On 28 Aug 2009, at 16:49, Nick Black wrote:


Hello,






*Next Meeting of the Local Chapters Group*

The local chapters working group will meet at 6pm BST on Weds 30th  
September to discuss these issues and others.  The agenda of the  
meeting is:


* What is the process for creating draft agreements and approving  
local chapters?  This includes a timeline for getting the first  
chapters set up and identifying any discussion items that the local  
chapters group feel may be blockers to moving forward with local  
chapter agreements.

* What is the process for continuing to refine the current agreement?
* Which parts of the agreement should be standard and which could be  
amended for each group?



The local chapters group will report back to this list after our  
meeting next week.  In the meantime, please comment on the agreement  
on the wiki page, or mail us directly at lo...@osmfoundation.org.



As agreed in an earlier thread on talk [1] can we have an email list  
for this subject. How about talk-local? Can we have it now!


It seems sensible to set this up and use it and the wiki to work  
things through for a while before considering the need for a  
conference call. If you do make a conference call then please take  
minutes and put them on the new public email list for people to read  
who were not on the call. I don't believe any decisions should be made  
on the conference call. Btw, I notice that there was a call on 24  
August 2009; can the minutes for that meeting be published prior to  
any further call?


Fyi, the 'proposed agreement' on the wiki makes no mention of a  
payment of £10, indeed the finance section starts "Local chapters and  
the OSMF being separate legel entities have their own sources of  
income like membership fees and donations and decide on their own what  
to do with their money. There is no automatic payment of money from  
local chapters to OSMF or vice versa" . Are you referring back to the  
original document? I believe we should all be working from the version  
on the wiki.



Thanks for pushing this forward Nick,


Peter

[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-August/040634.html











If you have a chapter you'd like to set up, please add it to the  
list here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/Proposed_Chapters



[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity


--
Nick Black
twitter.com/nick_b
___
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] RR8 - Possible International Vandal

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Sep 2009, at 13:18, Bjarki Sigursveinsson wrote:

I can confirm that the changes this user has made in Iceland are  
completely disruptive and illogical. The user has gone all around  
the country and either promoted or demoted roads in a seemingly  
random way without any regard to the established conventions of the  
Icelandic mapping community. I have tried communiating with this  
user but there have been no responses. The damage that has been done  
is way too widespread to be reverted manually.


I spoke to members of the Data Working Group recently and it seems  
clear to me (and them) that dealing with vandalism is in general a  
community problem, not their problem. They are mainly about dealing  
with those situations where a legal response is required such as  
copyright violation or where an official email might help. Banning  
people is a possible last-resort, but this does not deal with removing  
graffiti or spotting it in the first place which should be done by the  
community.


I believe that monitoring of graffiti (which this is) should be dealt  
with by the community. I believe that we need better tools to do this.  
Let's learn from the many Wikipedia 'counter-vandalism' tools which  
are available for use.[1]


I don't believe that anyone needs permission to develop, deploy or use  
such OSM counter-vandalism tools and would encourage people to do so.  
I would of course ask developers and users to follow the guidelines  
for bots.[2]



[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_counter-vandalism_tools
[2]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/Code_of_Conduct



Regards,



Peter






--
Bjarki Sigursveinsson
bja...@gmail.com
+354 8215644
Múlalandi 12 (403)
400 Ísafjörður, Iceland
___
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] RR8 - Possible International Vandal

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Sep 2009, at 14:54, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Lester Caine  
> wrote:
>> Bjarki Sigursveinsson wrote:
>>> I can confirm that the changes this user has made in Iceland are
>>> completely disruptive and illogical. The user has gone all around  
>>> the
>>> country and either promoted or demoted roads in a seemingly random  
>>> way
>>> without any regard to the established conventions of the Icelandic
>>> mapping community. I have tried communiating with this user but  
>>> there
>>> have been no responses. The damage that has been done is way too
>>> widespread to be reverted manually.
>>
>> It does sound as if it has reached the point where NONE of his  
>> edits can
>> be shown to be beneficial. So perhaps it is time simply to revert  
>> them
>> all? Especially if he is unwilling to defend his actions?
>
> I haven't looked through /all/ of his edits for Iceland. Currently he
> has 880 ways and 306 nodes to his name (user=RR8 in the XML) and I
> haven't gone through all his edits. But what I've looked at has been
> 100% harmful.
>
> He's re-classified highways in a manner that's inconsistent, arbitrary
> and completely ignores our previously established conventions[1].
> Including marking some things that were highway=primary before as
> highway=trunk and introducing highway=motorway in Iceland (which has
> no motorways).
>
> 1. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Is:Map_Features#Highway

I think we are needing to agree the protocol on the wiki for  
responding the vandalism. I have updated the response section of the   
vandalism page. Please do edit away until on the page and discuss the  
issues here until it is right. [1]

I suggest that where we find someone who has performed a significant  
number of edits which appear to be gratiffi (be it mindless,  
malicious, or whatever) and possibly many others that are of no clear  
benefit and none or very few that on casual inspection of a sample of  
edits are well researched then we should normally message them and if  
we don't get a response within 24-48 hours we revert them. If the  
edits are of a high-profile nature (such as these) we revert first and  
then message. We also add reverts to an appropriate wiki page to say  
what we have done.

We need a tool that will revert even if further edits have been made  
on top, and to highlight any ways that require manual attention  
because the reversion is too complex. We also need a tool to revert  
the revert in case the reversion was in itself vandalism or ill- 
thought out.

Fyi, we still need this tool to respond for Liam123 who still has many  
many current edits in the Essex/Kent areas (and also possibly some  
still in Germany and Spain which he also fiddled with).

None of this needs the permission of the Foundation, we are quite able  
to do this ourselves in the usual way and as Michael Collinson  
suggested at the AGM the Foundation should only be there to do the  
things that the community is not able to do (ie Finance and Legal).


[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism

Regards,


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: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Sep 2009, at 20:30, Peter Körner wrote:

> Sybren A. Stüvel schrieb:
>> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 09:17:11PM +0200, Peter Körner wrote:
>>> A revert is changing a lot of things in one time, which would be
>>> much more time-consuming with e.g. josm. I see this (doing a lot of
>>> things with just a single click) as the main problem with an easy
>>> revert tool without some kind of vote.
>>
>> In that case the entire API should be scrapped. After all, I can
>> easily make some small program
> You can do as, but with a webservice that takes a changeset-number  
> in a
> form and offers a revert-button, everybody can do this.

Yes, I would like to see a revert function available to which I could  
give a changeset to and it would revert all the changes made to the  
database within that changeset. It must flag the changes as being made  
by me and being made using that tool (I must take responsibility for  
the decision to revert and the tool must also be identified as it has  
some responsibility for the quality of the revert). Would the tool be  
something that ran on my computer? Possibly.

A good tool will need to be able to do this even when some changes  
have been made on top of the changeset and possibly highlight a few  
issues that cannot be reverted because of conflicts.

A good might be able to review all the changes made by a particular  
user over a period of time and list the status of the features before  
and after to assess what the user is doing and if there is any sense  
to it or what. It should be possible to revert multiple changesets by  
one user in this way.

A good tool might be able to monitor the minutely diffs and identify  
unlikely behaviour, such as someone randomly changing names for  
features that have been stable for some time, or moving nodes around  
that have been stable for some time. This is just a warning, not a  
definite problem and would need to be assessed.

A good tool might be able to monitor the minutely diffs and check  
names against a 'swear list' to check for unlikely street names and  
locality names etc. Not all rude names are incorrect as the book 'rude  
Britain' can testify but it is worth checking.[1]  The camp sites at  
Burning Man have some very offensive names as well.

A good tool might be able to import a 'white list' of trusted editors  
and then focus the attention on unknown contributors  in the minutely  
diffs feed. There would need to be a way for trusted users to give  
trusted status to others or challenge it and share lists.

A good tool might spot users breaking coastline or motorways or  
railway lines or administrative boundaries or other very established  
features and highlight this for review.

This tool should be configurable so that one can monitor only a part  
of the world that one is interested in, or only feature types that one  
is interested in, for example railways in Europe, or everything within  
a bounding box.

A good set of tools will allow us to revert vandalism within minutes.

Please can a bunch of coders get on with producing support for this  
important work. We have remarkably little graffiti but it does exist  
and will get more of a problem. It is such a shame to see vandalism  
messing up a lot of good work and we risk loosing established  
contributors unless we can protect the work already done better than  
we are doing.

We will of course have some revert wars, that would be a sign that we  
had the technology and needed to build the social infrastructure to  
control its use. Currently we don't seem to have the technology to  
revert changes where changes have been made on top.

You could check the tool on the edits made over the previous two  
months by Liam123, some of which have still not been reverted for lack  
of a suitable tool to achieve it.

[1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rude-UK-Exposed-British-Passages/dp/0752226657


Regards,


Peter



> 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: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Sep 2009, at 21:52, MP wrote:

>>> be added at the right side of every changeset line. One click might
>>> report "succeed" or "conflict/failed, do it manually".
>>
>> Until this is possible I want to try to (or at least collect all
>> necessary information to) write an external tool for this.
>
> Adding "revert" to main site could attract vandals (ok, let's just
> revert stuff) or experimentators (what does this button do?). I think
> better would be to have it as external tool that can either revert or
> prepare file for reverting (so that it would be loaded, checked and
> uploaded in JOSM) - reverting should be easy, but not that easy, that
> it would suffice to click one button to revert.
>

Only 'established users' can upload images to Wikipedia and I would  
suggest that the revert option is only available to established OSM  
users. It would need to take many edits to get 'established' but it  
means that there are some controls on 'drive-by vandals' who register  
and then cause mischief. I guess one can loose one's 'established  
user' credentials by partaking in vandalism.

>> Maybe such a tool could block such revert-reverts (A revert's Bs
>> changeset, B reverts As revert) and only allow them to others, to  
>> avoid
>> revert-wars. Maybe this should only happen after two rounds?
>
> How do you (automatically) distinguish revert from ordinary edit (or
> "almost-revert" from ordinary edit)? I think you can't at least not
> reliably (you can't rely on the commit message, etc ...)

I am not sure you need to. Not all reverts in Wikipedia use the revert  
mechanism, because for complex multiple edit vandalism it is easier to  
go back to a previoud version and cut the text from there and paste it  
in again. The main thing is to be able to see the differences between  
now and then for an area and decide what sort of revert is  
appropriate. For a simple single changeset a revert might often be  
good, however sometimes one might decide one needed to revert a part  
of the dataset wholesale. Not sure why.

A good tool might be able to identify a revert war by spotting tags  
for features that are flipping backwards and forwards frequently or  
tags that get created and deleted. Basically any feature that returns  
to a recent state again a number of times in a short period.

>
> So for avoiding revert war we need to use same mechanisms as for
> avioding any other unwanted edits - block users/IP's from editing, etc

These are surely the last line of defence and are easily circumvented  
unless the other devices are also in place.

To start with we need to be able to deal with the basic drive-by  
vandal (using a simple revert) and then be able to deal with people  
registering many names and doing a few edits with each (white lists  
and patrols might help here). For revert wars we need detection of  
flip-flopping features and we need human arbitrators. Only if all that  
fails do we need to start banning people which is something which only  
the Data Working Group can do - everything else if for the community  
to organise.


Regards,


Peter


> ...
>
> Martin
>
> ___
> 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] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools

[Peter Miller]

On 2 Sep 2009, at 22:35, Peter Körner wrote:

> Peter Miller schrieb:
>> On 2 Sep 2009, at 21:52, MP wrote:
>>>> Until this is possible I want to try to (or at least collect all
>>>> necessary information to) write an external tool for this.
>>> Adding "revert" to main site could attract vandals (ok, let's just
>>> revert stuff) or experimentators (what does this button do?). I  
>>> think
>>> better would be to have it as external tool that can either revert  
>>> or
>>> prepare file for reverting (so that it would be loaded, checked and
>>> uploaded in JOSM) - reverting should be easy, but not that easy,  
>>> that
>>> it would suffice to click one button to revert.
>>>
>>
>> Only 'established users' can upload images to Wikipedia and I  
>> would  suggest that the revert option is only available to  
>> established OSM  users. It would need to take many edits to get  
>> 'established' but it  means that there are some controls on 'drive- 
>> by vandals' who register  and then cause mischief. I guess one can  
>> loose one's 'established  user' credentials by partaking in  
>> vandalism.
> I don't think the number of edits is a good indicator of beeing  
> established. How about the time beeing an OSM member? Half a year  
> (maybe with activity every month) would be better, I think.

Registering, moving one node and then waiting for 6 months doesn't  
seem to be a good indicator of being a 'good citizen'

Making 10 changesets of more than 10 features each over a period of at  
least 2 weeks without attracting reverts or complaints should be  
sufficient I would have thought. That would mean that a newbie who  
gets on with it can be 'established' within 2 weeks. I think that was  
how long it took me to get rights to upload images to Wikipiedia. Some  
vandals will slip through, but that is fine - we can deal with them in  
the usual way.

>
>> For a simple single changeset a revert might often be  good,  
>> however sometimes one might decide one needed to revert a part  of  
>> the dataset wholesale. Not sure why.
> Our cool-tool could allow this as well.

Great.
>
> I'm thinking of a list of all changes with the option to choose an  
> action (revert, keep, revert tag(s), revert position, ...) So you  
> could mark those things that should stay as "ignore", leave the rest  
> as "revert" and let the tool do the work.

Sounds great.

I think the main message is 'please don't wait for permission to  
develop this' and get going! I love you practical energy on this. I  
agree that a web-service would be better that a downloadable tool - I  
would be much more likely to use a web-service, but any tool is better  
than no tool.

What we need now is for people to just get on with it and make tools  
and try them cautiously on small test edits and then try them on  
bigger stuff so we are ready for the big nightmare vandalism that  
could well occur before anyone attempts it. I can think of some very  
bad scenarios where people do very political edits to strategic parts  
of the map where it would generate a lot of press that would be read  
by millions of people. If we are not ready when it strikes we will  
descend again into a bear-pit of accusation and counter-accusation  
while leaving the graffiti in place for everyone to continue to write  
about - just think of some of the negative press that Wikipiedia as  
had over the recent years. The more high-profile users we get the more  
opportunity we have for big vandalism stories.


Regards,




Peter


>
> Peter
>


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Sep 2009, at 10:05, Pieren wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Dave  
> Stubbs wrote:
>> As far as I know most of the tools used for reverting currently are
>> also public -- the problem being, they're dangerous to use if you
>> don't know what you're doing, not at all user friendly, deliberately
>> hard to use to make sure you do know what you're doing, and not
>> remotely capable of dealing with conflicts.
>>
>> Dave
>
> That's where I disagree. We should stop considering 'revert' as
> 'dangerous to use if you don't know what you're doing'. It is not more
> dangerous as any other edits, it's just a different way to select
> elements and modify them. The only difference is that you refere to a
> particular state of the dataset (changeset) which might be obsolete
> (in which case the 'easy revert' should be aborted) in the same way as
> when two contributors work in parallel in the same area.
> We cannot say in one side "let the crowd create, modify or delete
> elements as easy as possible" and in the other side "make revert hard
> to use".
> I'm still in favour of having an "easy revert" as a first attempt on
> the main site and only provide more complexe tools into editors in
> case of conflicts.

I agree that there should be a 'easy revert' for a single changeset.  
This might result in a 'clean' revert (where none of the features have  
been touched since), a partial success with a conflict report (where  
only some features could e reverted because they have already been  
deleted or whatever), or a total failure  (possibly where the  
changeset has already been reverted).

This is not of course a 'revert' in that the original changeset will  
still be in the history, its just that the data will be back to the  
original state.

> But you will have to explaine how you deal with the
> 145 changesets of RR8 if you have to enter manually each number in
> your editor.

When it comes to reverting multiple changesets there will be a benefit  
to doing them all together possibly, or strictly in reverse order.  
Possibly this might need a different approach. If we can do it easily  
then great (one would normally select a single user and a date range  
to catch the relevant changesets).

An absolute essential is that a revert shows up as a changeset with a  
description that includes the fact that it was a revert and what it  
was reverting and can itself be reverted.

At some point we might need a speed tile redraw to get embarrassing  
stuff out of the tile stack quickly.



Regards,



Peter



> Pieren
>
> ___
> 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] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Sep 2009, at 12:33, Peter Körner wrote:

>> You could check the tool on the edits made over the previous two  
>> months by Liam123, some of which have still not been reverted for  
>> lack of a suitable tool to achieve it.
>
> Are you talking about http://openstreetmap.org/user/liam123 ? Are we  
> sure that this is really vandalism?

In a word - yes. Try this thread [1] or just Google for 'Liam123' for  
some background to exactly the same discussion from a month ago on  
talk-gb about vandalism, but without the result in a tool being  
developed.

>
> For now I won't commit anything to the api but just show the calls I  
> would have made (dry run) and I'll test it with some of my own  
> changes to avoid messing things up for others, but as time goes by  
> it would be good to have some examples to do practical testing.
>

Sounds good.


[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2009-July/004135.html


Regards,


Peter


> Peter


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools - work for copywriters!

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Sep 2009, at 14:34, Peter Körner wrote:

> Richard Weait schrieb:
>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Peter Körner> li...@mazdermind.de> wrote:
 Making 10 changesets of more than 10 features each over a period  
 of at
 least 2 weeks without attracting reverts or complaints should be
 sufficient I would have thought. That would mean that a newbie  
 who gets
 on with it can be 'established' within 2 weeks. I think that was  
 how
 long it took me to get rights to upload images to Wikipiedia. Some
 vandals will slip through, but that is fine - we can deal with  
 them in
 the usual way.
>>> We'll have to build a simple, calculateble and provable  
>>> explanation from
>>> that, that every newbee understands. Also we should create a error- 
>>> text
>>> that the tool displays when the conditions are not (yet) matched.  
>>> This
>>> text should not demoralize the avarage user and tell him how long it
>>> will take until he can use this tool and why he can't use it yet.  
>>> Any
>>> copywriter out here?
>>
>> The revert button (or other UI decoration) should not appear for  
>> users
>> that are not logged-in.  Perhaps revert should be invisible for users
>> that are not yet able to revert?
>
> I'm talking about building an external tool without any integration  
> into
> osm.org, as this is what i'm capable of. This tool can be visited by  
> any
> user and any user may do OAuth-Sign-In with this tool. The tool can't
> tell if the user is allowed to revert until he has gone through this
> procedure, so it's got to present a notice to the user that just
> authenticated and is still not allowed to use the tool.

Ok, so I have just had an RSS alert that Liam123 is back editing again  
today after a delay of 3 weeks. His edits are random and far reaching,  
often in Essex and Kent but also in other places. His edit log  
ominously says he is 'still editing' [1]

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/liam123/edits


Regards,



Peter



>
> 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: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Sep 2009, at 14:04, Andy Allan wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Peter Miller > wrote:
>
>> I agree that there should be a 'easy revert' for a single changeset.
>> This might result in a 'clean' revert (where none of the features  
>> have
>> been touched since),
>
> Just want to point out that there's more to life in OSM than
> particular features, and practically no changeset can be cleanly
> reverted. Two examples:
>
> Bad changeset #123: delete the node "London". Was node 456 v10, now
> 456 v11 (deleted)
> (Intermediate changeset: add a node for London)
> Revert changeset #123: node 456 hasn't been touched since, so  
> reinstate.

Could you put these as validation 'use cases' onto the wiki so that a  
tool can be tested against them? It will be very useful to have all  
the delinquent cases available for consideration before work starts on  
the code.

I guess that the tool should ideally be able to check for manual  
reinstatement of the same or similar features.

>
> Not what you wanted.
>
> Bad changeset #333: moved node #1234 (v2->v3) in way #4567 (v15 - not
> changed in this changeset)
> (Intermediate changeset: remove node #1234 from way #4567, but the
> node isn't itself deleted)
> Revert changset #333:  node #1234 hasn't been touched since, move it
> back to where it started.
>
Again, lets have this on the wiki please.

We also need to consider how relations can interact in difficult ways  
with the data.

> Not what you wanted either.
>
> The version numbers only apply to the primitives, not the state of the
> system (which has both relationships between primitives and spatial
> relationships). This makes hands-off reverting very tricky.
>
Sure, so possibly it should be 'hands on'. I am not getting into how  
it works or the solution at all, only that we need to get on with  
solving this interesting and tricky problem sooner rather than later.



Regards,


Peter



> Cheers,
> Andy


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

[OSM-talk] Inconsistency in way history?

[Peter Miller]

This page indicates that the last way says the last editor was Liam123  
on 2 June 2009
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/23180071

However, if one clicks the 'edit' button it goes to Potlatch and if  
one then clicks 'h' for history then it says the last editor is Mr  
Mark on 23 July 2009.

Fyi, Liam123 changed the this way from highway=unclassified to  
highway=secondary and added the tag ref=B1008 on 2 June 2009  which  
both appear to be incorrect.

Any explanations? something to do with ways and nodes possibly.



Regards,




Peter




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools - work for copywriters!

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Sep 2009, at 21:18, SteveC wrote:

>
> On 3 Sep 2009, at 07:04, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> Peter Miller wrote:
>> > Ok, so I have just had an RSS alert that Liam123 is back editing
>>> again today after a delay of 3 weeks.
>>
>> Probably because kids are back at school now.
>>
>> Look at his first changeset ever - it's next to his school. Of
>> course, it
>> would be an interesting experiment to e-mail the headteacher and let
>> him
>> know that his computer equipment is probably being used to vandalise
>> an
>> international collaborative project.
>
> Y'know I abused school computer equipment for most of my time in
> schools and universities, far better if someone can figure out how to
> help the kid out to the light side of The Force than to stamp on a
> little bit of creativity.
>
Liam123 is doing us a huge favour and I hope he continues to do what  
he has been doing for some time to come. We does some, but not too  
much damage every now and again and then gives us some time to improve  
our response. He has not done so much damage that it gets us negative  
publicity, but he is doing enough to force us to build an effective  
response which is just what we need at this point, and it is much  
better for us to be tested by some innocent graffiti and than anything  
more malicious. I am sure that in time he will become a more  
conventionally useful and upstanding member of society (as has our  
illustrious chairman;) ) however for now I suggest we allow him to  
carry on with his games while we get set up so we can respond in  
minutes to new interventions from him and others also also get some  
good tools to dig out all the previous mischief that he has left for  
us in the database (such as the B1008 which I spotted earlier today  
which he 'adjusted' back in June).

When we come to transfer to the new license we will of course need to  
be able to remove his and other contributions if we are not able to  
get an agreement to transfer to the new license, which might actually  
be another use for the same tools.



Regards,


Peter


> Yours &c.
>
> 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] RR8 - Possible International Vandal

[Peter Miller]

On 3 Sep 2009, at 22:17, Someoneelse wrote:

> Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> ... But I really need people familiar
>> with the region who tell me that they are reasonably sure that the  
>> edits
>> are bogus.
>
> If it helps, I've just looked at a selection of 20 of the 60 ways  
> edited
> in changeset 2308178 by RR8.  This covers north Nottinghamshire in
> England.  One edit looks possibly correct (a road number has been
> continued from an adjacent stretch of road; it's possible that that  
> that
> could be legitimate, the other 19 edits do not look likely to be valid

>
> I've added an entry to the table in
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GB_revert_request_log
> as that's been suggested as a way of keeping track of requests.
>
> I've looked at a smaller number of ways in other changesets by RR8 in
> the surrounding area (Derby / Notts / Sheffield).  All look similarly
> suspect.
>
>> Just because someone made bogus edits in Iceland doesn't
>> automatically mean he's messing up Ireland as well etc.
>
> It certainly looks like he/she/it is messing up Northern England.

I think we need to agree on some guidance for response to possible  
vandals and what level of checking should be performed prior to  
reversion.

Personally I would suggest:-

1) We should expect that all contributors should at all time attempt  
to make good, accurate and well researched changes
2) We need to ensure that every contributor is on-balance making the  
dataset better, not worse. If the contribution is in doubt we owe it  
to other contributors to investigate and respond.
3) We should be aware that people make mistakes, need time to learn  
and newbies often need and will respond to support
4) We can request, but not require contributors to add a comments to  
their changesets and to have created a useful personal page with some  
details about their interest and knowledge. Doing this makes reversion  
less likely and make it more likely that the person will be helped if  
needed.
5) In the event that someone seems to be doing strange edits one  
should initially assume 'good faith' but should watch carefully and  
discuss with others if appropriate.
6) If a significant number of edits to ways can be definitively proved  
to be malicious, obscene, libelous or it is considered that they might  
bring the project into disrepute then the related change-sets can be  
reverted immediately without discussion and without 100% checking of  
the rest of the change-set.
7) If the edits are dubious but it can't be proved to be incorrect  
then one should contact the person and ask for some additional  
information. If one don't get a reasonable response (or gets no  
response) and the dubious edits continue and there are not a good  
number of balancing clearly positive contributions then one should  
look to prove at least one bad edit and may then come to the decision  
in discussion with others that it is appropriate to revert the change- 
set in question and potentially all changesets by that person.
8) Once someone has been identified as a problematic contributor then  
one only needs to perform a brief of inspection of subsequent edits  
before reversion future changesets. Liam123 is in this category now.
9) If the problem continues (Liam123 is actually probably in this  
category) then one puts then on 'virtual ban' where their edits get  
reverted with no inspection of the merit of the changes unless the  
person contacts a sys-admin and says they have grown-up and want  
another chance.
10) I someone performs bad edits in any part of the world then they  
can expect to be a global response because it seems very unlikely that  
someone would mess with Ireland and do good work in Iceland and I am  
not sure I would want to work out what was going on in their head - I  
would prefer to protect the good work of others from mischief that  
allow good work to be messed on the off-chance that some good edits  
are also made in amongst the nonsense.
11) People who revert other people's work should expect to be able to  
demonstrate that the reversion was well reasoned and proportionate to  
the issue.

Can we work on this a little on the list and if there is agreement  
copy to resulting text to the wiki?


Regards,



Peter



>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
> ___
> 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] RR8 - Possible International Vandal

[Peter Miller]

On 4 Sep 2009, at 10:28, Liz wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Mike Harris wrote:
>> Peter
>>
>> Excellent summary - very well balanced. I would get particularly  
>> suspicious
>> of motivation where there was no response to courteous attempts to  
>> get in
>> touch to discuss.
> again general agreement
>>
>> Slight word of caution on the thought of not being expert in both  
>> 'Ireland'
>> and 'Iceland' for example. I hope to be just as competent (or not!)  
>> when on
>> vacation in 'Peru' as when near home base in 'Algeria' - although I  
>> would
>> be more cautious when on vacation (no local knowledge) I would hope  
>> that
>> the gpx traces would be as good and - hopefully - as useful and my  
>> level of
>> experience (or not!) much the same.
> some of us are involved in long distance mentoring and so you will  
> see edits
> in some strange places - but the locals are in this case very aware  
> of what we
> are doing.
>
>>
>> Would be good to have this on the wiki.
> and quickly!

I have now added it to the Vandalism wiki page [1]i. Do please 'watch'  
that wiki page and let's continue the conversation by finessing the  
vandalism page with discussion on the vandalism talk page. I have  
created a new category 'Counter vandalism' [2] (previous called 'anti- 
vandalism') for all pages relating to vandalism response.

As a general comment can we please start using the wiki for more  
conversations - talk is now so busy most of the time that I don't even  
read it and much of the detail could be handled with much more  
precision using the wiki.

There is a WikiCleanup project[3] that aims to get the wiki into a  
better state with better categories, linkage, titles and content! Do  
please join us because it is a big but very important job.

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Counter-vandalism
[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Cleanup


Regards,


Peter


> Liz
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] RR8 - Possible International Vandal

[Peter Miller]

On 4 Sep 2009, at 11:23, Peter Körner wrote:

>> tagging@ would be a start.
> And vandalism@

I would prefer counter-vandalism@

I also support Richard's suggestion of tagging@

Personally I think the wiki is an under-supported resource and much  
load would be taken off talk if it was better written but I do also  
acknowledge that the traditional primary form of communication within  
OSM is the list and it may be prudent to continue using lists for that  
communication.


Regards,


Peter


>
> 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: [OSM-talk] "corrections" by Ropino

[Peter Miller]

On 15 Sep 2009, at 17:58, Chris Hill wrote:

> David Earl wrote:
>> On 15/09/2009 16:47, Jonas Svensson wrote:
>>
>>> Besides check all those edits, what would be the best way to see if
>>> there are any changes in my area by that person? I have found one
>>> bad edit so far.
>>>
>>
>> Set up a RSS feed from ITO's OSM Mapper at
>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/osm/map
>>
>> That way you can mentor you area for changes by anyone.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
> ITO's feed is a great service, I just wish it was not a couple of days
> out of date.
>
Many apologies for the current delays at getting the information on  
OSM Mapper updated.

We are running a couple of days behind at present in general which is  
not ideal and now we have a technical hitch which is going to take a  
couple of days to fix - sorry about that.

Fyi, we have already done about half the technical work to speed up  
the import considerably and just need the time to finish it off but we  
have to juggle OSM work and commercial work.

Do also remember that we don't report on nodes yet, only ways so OSM  
Mapper won't yet spot isolated nodes being moved. Again we have work  
in progress to add nodes into the picture.



Regards,



Peter Miller
ITO World Ltd

> Cheers, Chris
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

[OSM-talk] proposed counter-vandalism / moderation list?

[Peter Miller]

In the UK we have had a significant number of counter-productive edits  
recently, including both mistakes and vandalism. There have also been  
recent issues in Ireland and Iceland and probably in other places that  
we are not yet aware of. On talk-gb we have been discussing the merits  
of a creating an international list to focus on the development and  
use of tools and social structures to protect the database from  
counter-productive edits and have agreed that it would be worth  
setting one up.

As a result I have now set up a wiki page with the basic information  
about the proposed list based on these discussions.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_moderation_list

So... I am now posting it on talk to get wider input... We need to  
agree a name and an initial brief that works well for the list. Feel  
free to edit the page or respond to this post as you see fit.


Regards,



Peter Miller (PeterIto)



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

[OSM-talk] Announcement re new 'moderation' email list to develop effective responses to vandalism and mistakes

[Peter Miller]

A new 'moderation' email list[1] has been created to help develop  
effective responses to vandalism and mistakes. To avoid spam  
subscriber's the first posts will be moderated so don't expect them to  
appear immediately. Subsequent posts will not be moderated.

[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/moderation

Regards,



Peter



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

[OSM-talk] England, Wales, Scotland borders

[Peter Miller]

On 4 Oct 2009, at 08:12, Igor Brejc wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For days now I've been trying to figure out how I could render borders
> between England, Wales and Scotland using OSM data, but I keep  
> stumbling
> into same issues. Frankly, I think the way these things are tagged  
> in UK
> is a mess (I don't know what the situation is in other places):
>
>   1. Borders between these countries are tagged with the same
>  admin_level=4 as that of subdivisions inside England (example:
>  North East England, http://osm.org/go/evykef-?relation=151164).
>  Now I'm not a constitutional expert, but I think Wales and
>  Scotland represent different level of territorial division than
>  just a collection of England's counties. And anyway, the
>  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative
>  states level 4 is used for "England/Scotland/Wales border" and
>  doesn't mention anything else.
>   2. There is no way to render JUST land borders. Maritime borders
>  (territorial waters) are tagged exactly the same way as their
>  continental counterparts. And even if you accept this limitation
>  and decide to render territorial waters they are usually cut off
>  in the available UK OSM extracts.
>   3. England's coast is also tagged as a border, but Wales' and
>  Scotland's isn't.
>
> Please take my criticism as a constructive one. I'm trying to use OSM
> data in a real-life situation and I think borders are some of the more
> important data, since they are usually visible in smaller-scale maps
> (but usually _without_ marked territorial waters). The way UK's  
> borders
> are now tagged, the only way to render them usefully would be to
> manually collect a list of OSM ways' IDs.
>
> Of course I could go and edit these things myself, but since I'm not
> usually covering this part of the world, I don't want to step on other
> people's toes :)

I have cross-posted this to talk-gb and I suggest that we continue the  
conversation there.

We certainly need to use different levels for the UK and england/ 
scotland/wales but as always with borders it is a bit sensitive about  
how one does it. Is Scotland a 'country' or a 'region' etc.

Regards,



Peter




>
> Best regards,
> Igor
>
> -- 
> http://igorbrejc.net
>
>
> ___
> 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] SteveC should decide

[Peter Miller]

On 4 Oct 2009, at 09:52, Rob wrote:

> John Smith wrote:
>> There will always be a vocal minority, it doesn't mean they are right
>> or they are speaking for the majority, they are just shouting the
>> loudest.
> Very true, although I'm a bit unsure about which vocal minority is
> shouting the loudest at the moment.
> Is it the anti-Führer anarchists or the pro-Führer tag fascists?
> It's _almost_ enough to distract the mapping sheep from our happy  
> mapping.
>

I though it was the Führer who was meant to shout loudest in such  
situations, but actually our Führer, if that is who he is, is being  
very quiet and may not actually be a Führer at all. Possibly he is  
just an ordinary sheep like the rest of us and is happily mapping in  
some sunny field somewhere and ignoring the whole thread!

Regards,



Peter


> rcr
>
>
> ___
> 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-legal-talk] Proper attribution

[Peter Miller]

On 20 Oct 2009, at 12:01, Tom Hughes wrote:

> On 20/10/09 11:36, Peter Miller wrote:
>
>> On 20 Oct 2009, at 11:03, Sam Larsen wrote:
>>
>>> I am looking into the proper attribution of OSM in a tiled web
>>> mapping scenario.  I know the guidelines on attribution can be found
>>> on the wiki - and i have read them.
>>> There is also the list of non-conforming sites: 
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution
>>> Does anyone think, we should have a list of 'conforming' sites - as
>>> the CloudMade maps and even the main www.openstreetmap.org are
>>> listed as not having proper attribution.
>>
>> I think we should be kicking arse to get better conformance on this
>> rather than accepting that major websites and players within the
>> community are not conforming.
>
> I think we should start by asking people nicely before we get all
> medieval on their arses, don't you?

I believe we have already asked nicely, but I am not actually  
suggesting that anyone applies their footwear to anyone else's trouser  
fabric of course, only that we should do what is necessary to ensure  
that we have our house in order before expecting the same from others.

As Frederick points out however, any contributor can challenge any  
user of the data on their attribution of the contributors work.
>
> Incidentally I would also point out that much of that page is the work
> of one especially vociferous individual and there is considerable  
> debate
> among other people as to whether all the claims made there are  
> accurate.
>
> I for example added text disputing whether openstreetmap.org was  
> lacking
> attribution and the user in question simply reverted that edit without
> any comment or discussion.
>
> The main issue of debate surrounds exactly what forms of attribution
> are/are not valid.

Sure, so lets get that page showing how things should be onto the wiki  
and then make sure all the projects close to OSM comply and then we  
can work out from there (and also ensure that the list of sites  
lacking proper attribution is accurate).

Regards,


Peter


>
> Tom
>
> -- 
> Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
> http://www.compton.nu/
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


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

[OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 8 Nov 2009, at 20:12, Anthony wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Liz  wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, Anthony wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Lester Caine   
>>> wrote:
 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> Yes, we know that everyone could probably use OSM maps for their
> business website if they spent a week surveying their  
> surrounding area
> / creating custom renderings. But that's not very helpful when  
> they
> can just embed Google instantly and get the same results.

 And how many of their competitors would also be linked to that  
 site via
 google's linked advertising?
>>>
>>> In this case (http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/about_us/map), none,
>>> because they plagiarized the map.
>>>
>>
>> and from http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/terms
>>
>> The material on this site is protected by international copyright and
>> trademark laws.
>>
>> They don't actually claim to own the material.
>
> More to the point, they don't claim to have created the material.  But
> they do use the work of others without giving those others credit.
> There's no mention of Google, and no mention of Tele Atlas.

Just to say that Campaign for Better Transport are out friends; they  
played host to a mapping party for use (in 2007?) and are a charitable  
partner for us. They have already provided £6K to the project from a  
charitable donation that needed a charitable partner and are likely to  
be a charitable partner for our purchase of a new exciting batch of  
out-of-copyright OS mapping in the next month (we had a meeting with  
them last week).

They moved offices a few weeks ago and it seems that they actually  
switched from OSM to Google Maps in the move and also failed to  
attribute properly.

I have just spoken to them and they will be back using OSM and will  
have proper attribution within 2 days if not in 2 hours!

So.. the moral of the story is.. assume good faith when attribution  
isn't show and ask them to do so. Only if one gets rebuffed should one  
start assuming the worst.

It on does get ignored then one should add the site to this wiki page.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution


Regards,


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: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 10 Nov 2009, at 11:36, Peter Childs wrote:

> While the map "quaility" may have some weight as to why people use
> Google (or Bing for that matter) I suspect the bigger problem is the
> User Interface.
>
> We have a good UI for map making maps but the API for rending and
> searching the maps is hmm well complicated.
>
> Part of the problem stems from there being so many different ways to
> do everything,
>
> I can't really say Google is any better at this really, but at least
> its well documented and everything is in one place.

Fyi, I have just had a response from Campaign for Better Transport.  
There are two reasons why they are not using OSM at present:

1) There is only partial building coverage which is confusing - they  
would prefer full or none but not partial. I will do a post to talk-gb  
to see if someone fancies doing some tracing in the area over the next  
week.

2) The tube and railway symbols are not the normal ones used within  
the UK. I will suggest that the overlay the normal UK symbols on the  
map in some editing software.

The above does however show the level of quality and completeness that  
will be required to win people over, aside from any usability issues  
and doubts over licensing and attribution.


Regards,


Peter


>
> 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: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 10 Nov 2009, at 12:33, Shaun McDonald wrote:

>
> On 10 Nov 2009, at 12:20, Peter Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> On 10 Nov 2009, at 11:36, Peter Childs wrote:
>>
>>> While the map "quaility" may have some weight as to why people use
>>> Google (or Bing for that matter) I suspect the bigger problem is the
>>> User Interface.
>>>
>>> We have a good UI for map making maps but the API for rending and
>>> searching the maps is hmm well complicated.
>>>
>>> Part of the problem stems from there being so many different ways to
>>> do everything,
>>>
>>> I can't really say Google is any better at this really, but at least
>>> its well documented and everything is in one place.
>>
>> Fyi, I have just had a response from Campaign for Better Transport.
>> There are two reasons why they are not using OSM at present:
>>
>> 1) There is only partial building coverage which is confusing - they
>> would prefer full or none but not partial. I will do a post to talk- 
>> gb
>> to see if someone fancies doing some tracing in the area over the  
>> next
>> week.
>
> You can turn the buildings off as another option:
> http://maps.shaunmcdonald.me.uk/?lat=51.517289&lng=-0.122566&zoom=15&layer=1

Sure, nice, but the maps from CM on your site say '(c) 2009 Cloudmade,  
map data CCYSA OpenStreetMap and contributors'. My reading of this is  
that CloudMade are claiming (c) over the rendered images which would  
make it illegal to copy them without permission. Such a restriction is  
of course incompatible with the CC-BY-SA OSM data licence and I have  
queried this with Nick on legal talk a few weeks ago[1] but have not  
had a response to be question.

I guess they could link into the CM system which is another idea, but  
currently they are just looking for a flat image.


[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-October/002936.html


Regards,


Peter



>
>>
>> 2) The tube and railway symbols are not the normal ones used within
>> the UK. I will suggest that the overlay the normal UK symbols on the
>> map in some editing software.
>
> A custom renderer could be setup with the symbols that are needed,  
> though if they are going to be clickable for more information  
> markers would possibly be better, though they would need to be  
> dynamically loaded.
>
> Shaun
>
>>
>> The above does however show the level of quality and completeness  
>> that
>> will be required to win people over, aside from any usability issues
>> and doubts over licensing and attribution.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 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
>


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 8 Nov 2009, at 20:12, Anthony wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Liz  wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, Anthony wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Lester Caine   
>>> wrote:
 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> Yes, we know that everyone could probably use OSM maps for their
> business website if they spent a week surveying their  
> surrounding area
> / creating custom renderings. But that's not very helpful when  
> they
> can just embed Google instantly and get the same results.

 And how many of their competitors would also be linked to that  
 site via
 google's linked advertising?
>>>
>>> In this case (http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/about_us/map), none,
>>> because they plagiarized the map.
>>>
>>
>> and from http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/terms
>>
>> The material on this site is protected by international copyright and
>> trademark laws.
>>
>> They don't actually claim to own the material.
>
> More to the point, they don't claim to have created the material.  But
> they do use the work of others without giving those others credit.
> There's no mention of Google, and no mention of Tele Atlas.
>

A brief update - Shaun and I have been sorting this out with CBT in  
the past 24 hours and they now have a new shiny CloudMade slippery map  
interface on their site with the normal CM attribution[1]. They also  
still have their link to the CycleStreets site with a pre-defined  
destination for their office in the link which works really well.

Moral of the story - assume good intentions and contact the  
organisation involved!

[1] http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/about_us/map



Regards,


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: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 11 Nov 2009, at 14:58, Anthony wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Peter Miller  > wrote:
>> My reading of this is
>> that CloudMade are claiming (c) over the rendered images which would
>> make it illegal to copy them without permission. Such a restriction  
>> is
>> of course incompatible with the CC-BY-SA OSM data licence
>
> No it isn't.  You have to copyright a work in order to release it
> under the CC-BY-SA license.

Sure, but they are not stating that they are releasing their  
copyrighted rendering as CC-BY-SA so I don't know if I can recommend  
that people use it.

To be clear, the ODbL license, when it arrives, will allow people to  
create renderings that are (c) and are which are not then released  
CCBYSA which I think will be good for the project because people will  
be able to commercially exploit clever rendering and analysis of OSM  
data to create beautiful things - including artistic maps based on OSM  
data. Currently the artist would probably need to release their work  
as CCBYSA. Using ODbL people will also be able to public domain  
renderings. All of this creates a ot of new incentives to use OSM data  
for different purposes.

The big rule in ODbL is that the core database (as distinct from  
rendering) must be released under an open data license and also any  
derived database from the osm database must be released under ODbL  
which therefore allows anyone else to produce beautiful renderings in  
competition with these people so we have a nice level of competition  
working.

Indeed, it is important to our company (ITO World) that we can produce  
sophisticated images and analysis by combining OSM data with other  
separate databases and create a work that we can then protect and sell  
- without that right to earn income from our analysis and rendering  
then we would be much less interested in OSM.

I suspect that the same may be true for CM in that they have spent a  
lot of money building up a rendering system, have created excellent  
rendering rules and built a style editor and now need to earn some  
money from it somehow - allowing anyone to harvest their tiles for any  
purpose for free including being able to host tiles scraped from CM on  
a competing (free?) service would probably be really bad news for them.

As such I think they have probably written their attribution to suit  
the upcoming license rather than the current one, but without  
clarification I would not suggest that people should scrape their map  
times for use on other services.



Regards,



Peter Miller





Regards,


Peter




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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Spam] bus route/relations done right

[Peter Miller]

On 13 Nov 2009, at 11:04, Jozef Riha wrote:

> hello all,
>
> i'd like to review/finish mapping of bus/tram network during my stay
> in bern (ch) and do this right so that no time is wasted fixing my
> mistakes. i read through wiki pages but there're still some points
> open. for my examples to be more explanatory please open the following
> osm file which i'll be referring to. the download url is
> http://nic-nac-project.org/~jose1711/donotdelete/bus_route.osm
>
> i consider bus 1 route to be the correct way of entering a simple
> route. backward/forward rules are based on the way's orientation, not
> Terminus A -> Terminus B or vice versa orientation just as the wiki
> says. what to do though when it's not really clear what way does the
> bus stop belong to like in bus route 2? how do i know if it's forward
> or backward role i should use when i don't know to which way the bus
> stop is connected. consider that i may not be able to change
> orientation (situation: oneway for cars, buses can drive both
> directions). also, does the ways (segments) in relation need to be
> ordered or this is mandatory for bus stops only?
>
> next thing. i have seen many osm users create bus routes such as route
> 4, while i think the correct way is route 3. am i correct?
>
> thank you for your comments,

You might like to direct this one to talk-transit
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Thanks,


Peter Miller

>
> jozef
>
> ___
> 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] What Streets are in what Places

[Peter Miller]

On 13 Nov 2009, at 12:00, Florian Lohoff wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 07:43:20AM +, Peter Childs wrote:
>> However in OSM places are points not area's and the areas we do have
>> are either to do with admin (ie Counties, Borough's etc) and hence  
>> are
>> rather less than helpful.
>>
>> The is_in tag is not a lot of use either due to it being  
>> inconsistent.
>>
>> I could do it with some kind of nearest function but I don't think
>> this is going to give me the right answer either.
>>
>> What is in a place, is often to do with other geographic features,
>> like gaps in housing, majro roads etc, and also to do with history,
>>
>> What I would like to do is write a script that takes the planet and
>> gives a list of the places (towns, villages etc) and a polygon/area
>> for each place.
>>
>> While I don't think this list would be worth piping back in to the
>> database, it might be useful for knowing what were missing.
>>
>> Maybe Places should be area's rather than points anyway.
>
> This is a quite complicated thing to do - Some parts of the world
> fill very quickly with admin boundaries and using them for searching
> in the garmins would definitly give them a strong boost which i'd like
> to see.

We already have data for all 50K places in Britain available for  
import into OSM as part of the NaPTAN dataset. [1] All of the 50K  
places in this dataset have a boundary (which is approximate) which is  
based only on whether a bus stop is in a place or not. Each place also  
has a geocode for its 'centre. Places can have parents and children so  
one can model suburbs,

Here are some examples of the data that is available:
http://www.itoworld.com/static/screenshots?product=NAPTAN&id=3
http://www.itoworld.com/static/screenshots?product=NAPTAN&id=1

Of course there is always 'creep' of desirable and undesirable places  
(where people say they live in the posh bit, not the non-posh bit next  
door - lots of room for negotiation of boundaries, but highly valuable  
and useful data all the same).

I was also talking just this morning about the value of this data and  
if such a boundary-of-places dataset could be produced for Northern  
Ireland within OSM (Northern Ireland is part of the UK but this data  
is not yet available within NaPTAN).

ITO has a new product for directing people by public transport and we  
need to know whether a bus stop is within a place or not - we can  
guess, but it would be much better not to guess and this is what we  
need to do that.

In short, I and my company and indeed Travline/DfT would strongly  
support to option to include boundary polygons for places within OSM  
together with a relation and a point geocode for the place.

Yahoo is also collecting useful data of this sort which I understand  
they are planning to release for reuse.


[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN


Regards,


Peter


>
> The other point is that people are used to fuzzy or non exact  
> search. For
> example i am living in a Town called Rietberg which has a large area  
> it covers.
> There are multiple suburbs which are very distinct from Rietberg the  
> town
> itself. People are used to be able to search for either Rietberg or
> even the suburbs names e.g. "Mastholte" or "Varensell" - So in google
> ou can search for
>
>   Alt Hammoor 38, Rietberg, Germany
>   Alt Hammoor 38, Mastholte, Germany
>
> which is the same place - Postal wise the address is 33397 Rietberg
> but all in car navigations are happy to accept Mastholte aswell.
>
> This gets more complicated taking large citys like Berlin - where the
> individual districts are their own administration and therefor have  
> their
> own admin_level 8 boundary. People on the other hand are used to  
> search
> for Gorßbeerenstraßen, Berlin to work - e.g. spit out all the  
> Großbeerenstraße
> Berlin has (Mentioning the District - TomTom does this).
>
> So - it comes down that people are used to search for admin_level=10  
> names
> and content and for admin_level=6 Content which will then look for all
> content in admin_level=6+  ..
>
> So - i'd vote for strictly using admin boundarys and invent some tags
> for giving some hints - It does not make sense to include  
> admin_level=4
> or most of the time it does not make sense to include admin_level=6  
> for
> searching (Kreis Gütersloh for example makes no sense) - But sometimes
> it should be included that you look for
>
>   Großebeerenstraße, Berlin
>
> and get
>
>   Großebeerenstraße, Kreuzberg, Berlin
>   Großebeerenstraße, Lichterfeld, Berlin
>
> aswell as beeing able to search for
>
>   Großebeerenstraße, Kreuzberg
>
> Searching for place nodes and guessing is prone to errors and  
> hinting will be
> on a per street level which will be very hard to maintain and  
> include so ...
> Admin boundarys are there for a reason ...
>
> Flo
> -- 
> Florian Lohoff f...@rfc822.org
> "Es ist ein grobes Missv

Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3

[Peter Miller]

On 23 Nov 2009, at 16:58, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:

> El Lunes, 23 de Noviembre de 2009, Richard Fairhurst escribió:
>> Potlatch now lets you zoom in as far as zoom level 23. Previous
>> versions only went up to z19, and even then with some loss of
>> positional accuracy.
>
> I can already see the headlines of Potlatch 2.0:
>
> "Potlatch, now with more resolution than the real world!"

The excellent book 'Map Addict' muses about the ultimate 1:1 map  
quoting from a story of 'exactitude in science' from 1946 as follows:  
"and so the College of Cartography evolved a Map of the Empire that  
was the same scale as the empire and that coincided with it point for  
point... succeeding generations came to judge a map of such magnitude  
cumbersome, and not without irreverence they abandoned it to the  
rigours of the sun and rain'

I am sure that Potlatch 2.x will never be abandoned to the rigours of  
the sun and rain (even if Potlatch 1.x does meet that fait ;) )

A thoroughly recommend book. The only heath warning is that the guy  
loves the Ordnance Survey and can't bring himself to even mention OSM  
- he nearly does but clearly OSM is not a proper map to his mind.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Map-Addict-Mike-Parker/dp/0007300840

Great work Richard.



Regards,


Peter


>
> :-P
>
> -- 
> --
> Iván Sánchez Ortega 
>
> Un ordenador no es un televisor ni un microondas, es una herramienta  
> compleja.
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

[OSM-legal-talk] wikipedia moving to cc-by-sa

[Peter Miller]

I have just been reading about the wikipedia foundation's recent vote to
start a process to migrate their project to CC-BY-SA

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter

 

___
legal-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-legal-talk] The OSM licence: where we are, where we're and are, where we're going

[Peter Miller]

For the record, my vote is strongly for the spirit of CC-BY-SA (as long as
it delivers). At STOM7 there was precious little preparation and as a result
I don't think the vote should be taken very seriously. We must remember that
this is a very fast moving legal area, the wikipedia GNU problem mentions
that SOTM may well soon be.

 

There are clearly uncertainties and complications with the current licence,
however it does allow for the license to be upgraded without going back to
original contributors for permission. As such I feel confident that CC could
come up with a derivative of CC-BY-SA 3.0 that covers our needs and plug the
gaps (and those of other gedata/DB type datasets generally); after all, if
the ODL can do it then why can't CC do it

 

Anyway, let's continue batting this one around and see where we get to, but
I am focusing on a CC-BY-SA style license that works, not a PD vs CC-BY-SA
debate.

 

Btw, where should this debate be happening? Personally I suggest the legal
nerdy details are discussed on legal-talk but any discussion about
principles are discussed on 'talk'

 

.

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

___
legal-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-legal-talk] where we are, where we're going

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:00:27 +
> From: Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The OSM licence: where we are,  where
>   we're   and are, where we're going
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
>   format="flowed"
> 
> (follow-ups to legal-talk, please)
> 
> Peter Miller wrote:
> 
> > There are clearly uncertainties and complications with the current
> licence,
> > however it does allow for the license to be upgraded without going back
> to
> > original contributors for permission.
> 
> In OSM's case that's unlikely to be true.
> 
> Copyright in OSM contributions is owned by the original contributors,
> not by OSMF. As the CC-BY-SA 2.0 summary says, "A new version of this
> license is available. You should use it for new works, and you may
> want to relicense existing works under it. No works are automatically
> put under the new license, however."
> 
> Since no works are automatically put under the new licence, every
> contributor would have to choose to move to (say) CC-Data-BY-SA just
> as they would any other licence.
> 
>

Not true. The licence upgrade clause in CC-BY-SA 2.0 states in clause b:
"You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly
digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of this License, *a
later version of this License* with the same License Elements as this
License"(my emphasis). This allows the OSMF (on anyone else) to distribute
OSM data using CC-BY-SA 3.0, 4.0 or whatever  I am really concerned that
this whole drama is being built on false foundations.

  
> > As such I feel confident that CC could
> > come up with a derivative of CC-BY-SA 3.0 that covers our needs and plug
> the
> > gaps (and those of other gedata/DB type datasets generally); after all,
> if
> > the ODL can do it then why can't CC do it
> 
> The following background is absolutely crucial. It's in the
> OpenGeoData post but I'll take the chance to restate it. I'd encourage
> you, Longbow4u and others to reflect on it.
> 
> * The Open Data Commons Database Licence is a share-alike licence with
> attribution elements. It is, as you say, "in the spirit of CC-BY-SA".
> 
> * Its authors are working with Creative Commons.
> 
> * Creative Commons has a strong policy that "facts are free"[1]. They
> have therefore now introduced a "licence" for factual information, but
> this is essentially public domain (CC0/PDDL) with a voluntary request
> to share info. We are _not_ recommending that OSM adopts that licence.
> The ODC Database Licence is entirely separate.
> 
> 
> So to specifically answer your point about "if the ODL can do it then
> why can't CC do it":
> 
> * CC doesn't believe factual information should be subject to
> restrictions, so _won't_ do it.
> 
> * But if CC were to do it (if, for example, they were lobbied to do
> so), their existing collaboration with ODC makes it very likely that
> they would actually adopt the Open Data Commons Database Licence.
> 
> In other words, this option is significantly _more_ copyleft than CC
> themselves propose.
> 

I am not really convinced by your argument on copyright/DB rights. A map is
not a factual in the same way that a gazetteer would be or a telephone
directory. Other mapping companies using copyright combined with contract.
You say that we don't have a contract but the CC-BY-SA 3.0 licence says: "TO
THE EXTENT THIS LICENSE MAY BE CONSIDERED TO BE A *CONTRACT*, THE LICENSOR
GRANTS YOU THE RIGHTS CONTAINED HERE *IN CONSIDERATION OF YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF
SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS*" (my emphasis). So we OSMF can distribute
under CC-BY-SA 3.0 or above, CC-BY-SA 3.0 (and above) is a contract (to the
extent that it can be in law), and this is the very similar to the legal
arrangements protecting Navteq's $8billion asset base. If we stick with
CC-BY-SA then we don't have to ask permission of our contributors and the
risk of any split removed.


> 
> > Btw, where should this debate be happening? Personally I suggest the
> legal
> > nerdy details are discussed on legal-talk but any discussion about
> > principles are discussed on 'talk'
> 
> It's a good point, but in practice legal-talk will work best because
> it's very difficult to separate the two, and because discussions will
> drift from one to the other. We also don't want to overwhelm the rest
> of the project with it!
> 

Fine. Can I suggest that you respond

[OSM-talk] Bounty for mapping Mottram and Tintwistle areas! (west of Machester on edge of peak district near Glossop)

[Peter Miller]

There is a really messy public inquiry into a controversial road scheme on
the edge for the Peak District national park on the A268. You can read all
the gory details on the wikipedia article here: in summary: 4 mile route,
£180m scheme (doubled in cost since 2006), public inquiry adjourned till at
least Easter 2008, inquiry cost so far is £4m, Highways Agency in real
trouble with traffic modelling, mapping is rubbish: 

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

 

The DfT have published various maps (notice that the location of the tunnel
mentioned in the article above is not shown at all!):

http://www.saveswallowswood.org.uk/background.shtml

http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/projects/10084.aspx

 

Here is a Google Maps overlay that I have done to get my head around what it
is all about (try fiddling with terrain setting)

Mottram
<http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=10727925564616544
9244.0004443e390678cca733f&ll=53.474255,-1.990929&spn=0.049246,0.138531&z=13
&om=0>  Tintwistle proposal overlay 

 

The Highways Agency has been making a right meal of the traffic modelling
and the inquiry has been adjourned 4 times to let them sort it out (it keeps
on showing that traffic will get worse!)

http://www.glossop.com/bypass.htm

 

Here is a news item when the inquiry was suspended

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjM99O2WwI8

 

However the OpenStreetMap coverage needs some work before it can be used

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.4604
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.4604&lon=-1.9787&zoom=13&layers=B0FT>
&lon=-1.9787&zoom=13&layers=B0FT

 

 

My company wants to sponsor someone who would like to spend some time in a
mixture of beautiful countryside and a transport nightmare and complete the
OSM mapping within the scheme area (as outlined on the Google overlay). We
would pay travel expenses and a per-day rate. Accommodation would be
provided by local campaigners.  My company will then look to see what we can
do to help present to the public and officials with a clearer idea of the
options than can be achieved with the current mapping in true
‘neo-geographer’ way. Others will of course all have access to the resources
for their own purposes.

 

We would be looking for the following:

*   All roads, including classification, name, one way status in the
area

*   Schools, pubs and other significant community facilities within the
scheme area

*   The locations of key buildings that will be destroyed by the scheme

*   Key footpaths, in particular the walks mentioned on the campaign
site: http://www.saveswallowswood.org.uk/walks.shtml

*   An approximate outline of Swallow wood.

*   An indication of the location of the new road and the position of
the entrances to the tunnel section to the extent that this is practical.

*   Enter all data in OSM and validate by mid March at the latest.

 

 

Please ask any questions on the list or email me directly if you are
interested.

 

 

Thanks,

 

 

Peter

 

 

 

Peter Miller

Ito World Ltd

63 Cowper Street

Ipswich IP45JA

(m) +44 (0)7774 667213

 <http://www.itoworld.com> www.itoworld.com

 

<>___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-legal-talk] Progressing OSM to a new data Licence regime

[Peter Miller]

As a sanity check can I propose a few uses of OSM data and see if we think
they would be allowed, or not allowed, based on the proposed licence and
also if we would want them to be allowed or not. Can I suggest that we build
up a library of such scenarios and for each one discuss any legal
difficulties?

 

Someone takes OSM data and creates a map of an area of the country and
surrounds it with photos and diagrams and wants the collection to be C to
them. I would hope that this was allowed but that the person was expected to
put a licence phrase relating to the OSM content on the resulting map.

 

Someone take OSM data, makes some additions to the street data and then
publishes it as above with additional photos and diagrams. I would hope that
this was allowed, that a message on the paper map was required and that the
updated 'Derived Database' of OSM data was made available in a suitable and
usable form for inclusion in OSM in the future.

 

Someone creates a video animation from OSM data to be broadcast as part of a
news package on the BBC. I would hope that it would be ok, but that a
acknowledgement for OSM was included in the credits or visibly as part of
the animation or by other means, possibly on their web site if there was
genuinely no reasonably way to include it in the broadcast.

 

BadMapCo creates a Collective Work based on their own mapping data (roads in
most places and footpath/cycle path data in places) and augment this with
additional footpath/cycle path from OSM (taken as a Derivative Database with
a geocoded boundary) and then published the resulting DB as C BadMapCo as a
Collective Database with acknowledgement for OSM. Over time they reduce the
area taken from OSM until it isn't necessary any more, but by shrinking the
area which they use from OSM as they complete their own surveying they never
add any content to the Derived Database to offer back to us.

 

LicenceBreaker creates a Collective Database with OSM data and some other
random Public Domain geocoded photos and publishes it as a Collective Work
as PD (which I think the licence currently allows). Someone else takes the
PD Collective Work and removes the irrelevant photos and publishes the
original OSM data as PD.

 

BadInternetCompany takes OSM data, uses it to create mapping and offers it
to the public and then encourages their users to correct and improve it, but
claim that, since it is only for 'internal' use, they therefore don't have
to offer any content back to OSM.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

___
legal-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk] Teleatlas file format

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:54:59 +
> From: Alilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [OSM-talk] Teleatlas file format
> To: "Talk Openstreetmap" 
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Does any one know what file format or database Teleatlas/navteq uses
> for the maps they are selling to their clients?
> Is there a sample file somwhere? I searched and didn't find any.
> 

We have bought Navteq data and OS data in MIF/MID format which is pretty
simple.

One can also normally request it as:
ESRI Shape file, MapInfo TAB

This looks useful, they seem to offer downloads in different formats
http://www.xyzmaps.com/sample.htm


There are many others (see this quote)!
"You can also use the built-in converters to convert maps from MapInfo
MIF/MID, ESRI SHP, ESRI .E00, TIGER, SDTS, VPF, DLG, and AutoCAD DXF or DWG
formats, as well as over 75 other formats.  Manifold can read terrain
elevation data and satellite photos in all popular formats.  US government
servers are a great source for hundreds of thousands of free maps and data
sets.  Since Manifold can import data from Oracle OCI, ODBC, OLE DB, ADO
.NET databases as well as file-oriented database formats like DBF, XLS, MDB
and many others, numerous "text" and other format databases may be used to
create maps."
http://www.manifold.net/explore/faq.html



See link here for an example order form:



> Alilo
> 



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Bounty for mapping Mottram and Tintwistle areas! (west of Machester on edge of peak district near Glossop)

[Peter Miller]

 

Back in January I asked
<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-January/022343.html>  if
there was anyone who could map the Mottram area for a bounty where there is
a controversial road being proposed. I am pleased to say that RichardB took
up the challenge and that the area has now well and truly mapped
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.467&lon=-1.9876&zoom=14&layers=B0FT> !

 

For your interest the public inquiry which was due to restart this week
(Easter 2008) has now been delayed again until October to allow the Highways
Agency more time to getting it traffic forecasts to work in the way they
want to.

 

This job does raise an important question about how to map and model
proposed roads. We have used the tags 'highway=trunk' and 'tunnel=yes' and
name='Mottram . bypass (proposed)', 'proposed=trunk' and added a note. It
would be better not to have to use the tunnel tag to get it to render
properly (especially as part of the road is indeed in a proposed tunnel
which we can't represent!). Btw, the Glossop Spur didn't render properly
this week under mapnik and I think (hope) it was because I used
'tunnel=true' not 'tunnel=yes'. I have changed the tags for the Glossop Spur
so that they are now identical to that for the main bypass and should render
properly next week. 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter Miller

Ito World Ltd

 

 

 

<>___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Peter Miller]

Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions:

1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously (such as
the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get built? I think
I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways agency for
now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to render in
the mean time).

2) I have a more difficult job with the new Haughley Bends upgrade on the
A14. A new section of A14 is being opened in the summer 08 and then the old
carriageways will be closed for 6 months and will then re-emerge as a
tertiary road (the west carriageway) and a bridleway (the east carriageway)
for most of the old section in Dec08, although a couple of short bits will
be grubbed up entirely and some new linking bits will be created. Is there
any way of coding such a thing? I feel it may be better to create a
relationship around all of the old stuff and say that it is going to go on
the switchover date, and then separately model the new network for the
replacement. Currently one has to add dates to every single little section
of road and as the opening date slips one should really change all the dates
which would be bonkers. In reality when a scheme opens in parts one might
have a series of versions of the model to be used in turn.

I realise that I am pushing the model beyond its initial intentions but we
are going to need to have robust ways of dealing with change.



Regards,





Peter



> -Original Message-
> From: Robert (Jamie) Munro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 28 March 2008 12:29
> To: Peter Miller; Talk Openstreetmap
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Peter Miller wrote:
> |
> | This job does raise an important question about how to map and model
> | proposed roads. We have used the tags 'highway=trunk' and 'tunnel=yes'
> | and name='Mottram . bypass (proposed)', 'proposed=trunk' and added a
> | note. It would be better not to have to use the tunnel tag to get it to
> | render properly (especially as part of the road is indeed in a proposed
> | tunnel which we can't represent!). Btw, the Glossop Spur didn't render
> | properly this week under mapnik and I think (hope) it was because I used
> | 'tunnel=true' not 'tunnel=yes'. I have changed the tags for the Glossop
> | Spur so that they are now identical to that for the main bypass and
> | should render properly next week.
> 
> The correct tagging is to put a start_date that is somewhere in the
> future (i.e. the estimated date of completion of the project). I don't
> think renderers support this yet - they just render it as a normal road.
> They should render it as under construction (or not at all) if the date
> is in the future, and normally otherwise. Similarly for end_date. Dates
> should be in -MM-DD format as this is the most easily machine
> readable. I think renderers should allow partial dates - so if you know
> something will open in 2010, but not what month, you can just put
> start_date=2010, or if you know it's February start_date=2010-02.
> 
> I also think renderers should ignore things after a space, so you can
> put "start_date=2010-01-01 approximately" or "start_date=2010 proposed"
> or other unforeseen uses.
> 
> Robert (Jamie) Munro
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFH7OSOz+aYVHdncI0RAuWKAKD8Zfojnl07nhH78z72H4bs4pgRGQCfZLnl
> s1g5bSrPwSpHRz899DtZc20=
> =kaiQ
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Cycle Lanes

[Peter Miller]

Can I suggest that the vehicle oneway=yes/no attribute should be able to
take an additional value of 'reverse' to make all the tags independent of
the direction of the way and avoid the need to reverse ways at all. I do
agree that attributes should use prefix values of forwards/backwards and
left/right and that editors should reverse these if the way is reversed.

Btw, this approach is used by GDF where a direction attribute is used which
can take the values 'traffic is allowed in both directions', 'traffic is
closed in the positive direction', 'traffic is closed in the negative
direction' and 'traffic is closed in both directions' (9.3.6). I believe
that this attribute in GDF can be used in conjunction with a vehicle class
to create different rules for different types of vehicle (including
pedestrians and cyclists).

With regard to the debate about separate tracks or a 'handed' attributes for
the road I would suggest that there are times where either might be
appropriate, but that it would be reasonably easy to create a separate track
automatically from a 'handed attribute' if required (and would be much
easier than the reverse transformation) so the handed approach should be
preferred.

I also suggest that it will be easier for the renderer to encode parallel
cycle lanes on cycle maps using the convention of colour coding the casing
of the road if the handed approach is used. Currently there are a lot of
problems with separate cycle tracks close to roads getting obscured by the
road itself or indeed obscuring the road.

Personally I will continue to use handed attributes where the track is
parallel to the road and where there is no barrier between the track and the
road (other than some grass and a kerb).

Fyi, the Cycle Data Standard for the Department for Transport in the UK that
I worked on in the autumn used the concept of an 'offset path' which had is
own identity (and could therefore be used in relationships) but which
borrowed its geometry from the main way to avoid all the problems of
stitching the way into all the side streets and to allow 'casing colour'
style maps to be created. I am requesting that they publish the standard so
we can compare and contrast and will let you know when it becomes available.




Regards,



Peter Miller




> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:41:26 + (UTC)
> From: David Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Cycle lanes
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> Martin Vidner  vidner.net> writes:
> 
> > Make the prefixes "left:", "right:" special in the sense that when a
> > way is reversed, they get swapped.
> > So left:highway=bus_stop would become right:highway=bus_stop.
> > (Uh, maybe this is awkward for the renderer implementation. Could be
> > better to prefix the *value* instead: highway=left:bus_stop?)
> 
> 
> It seems to me that you could define the two sides of a way independent of
> the
> direction (if any) of the way. I'm just not sure what you would call the
> two
> sides.
> 
> For example, lets start with "north" and "south". This would unambiguously
> define the two sides for all ways that are not running directly (or close
> to)
> north-south. "East" and "west" would work for those of course, but we want
> the
> same name no matter what the angle of the road.
> 
> Maybe you could use "clockwise" and "anticlockwise" to define the side of
> that
> portion of the road you would get if you rotated it in that direction.
> 
> So what I am basically getting at is that you don't need to define the
> side of
> the road based on the way direction, as it can be defined by the compass
> points,
> I'm just not sure what the two labels would be. Maybe "north-or-east" and
> "south-or-west" shortened to "noe" and "sow" could work if everything was
> clearly defined on the wiki.
> 
> - David
> 



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Peter Miller]

The 'dirty hack' was recommended on this list so I am only following orders
;)

I am not personally qualified to go tinkering with Mapnik and osmarender and
don't intend to practice now but

I would be happy to put a small bounty forward for the work to be done. My
company would be happy to give £150 but would need a receipt. If I get more
than one offer I will either choose based on experience or take a name out
of a hat.

A spec would need to be produced and agreed by the community prior to
implementation. I guess the renderer should show as proposed anything with a
proposed= tag and a start-date= tag where the date is in the future. If the
start date is in the past then it should be shown as existing. The tagging
method would also need to be properly documents on the wiki.

What I do ask is that the feature is left in the dataset for the time being.
I intend to take a cut of it on Thursday (assuming it renders properly on
mapnik) and put it into the wikipedia article for the road.


Regards,



Peter

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave
> Stubbs
> Sent: 31 March 2008 18:04
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: Robert (Jamie) Munro; Talk Openstreetmap
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass
> 
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Peter Miller
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >  Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions:
> >
> >  1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously (such
> as
> >  the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get built? I
> think
> >  I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways agency
> for
> >  now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to render
> in
> >  the mean time).
> 
> 
> By "tunnel trick" I presume that you mean tag it as a tunnel so that
> it turns up dotted, despite not being a tunnel, nor ever will be a
> tunnel?
> 
> That's not a trick, that's a dirty, dirty hack and should be stomped on
> hard.
> 
> If you want proposed roads to show up dotted then fix the renderer,
> don't engage in phantom tagging.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Peter Miller]

Excellent. Thanks Steve.

So how should a proposed road be tagged? Should it be highway=proposed
Proposed=trunk Name=foo bypass?


Peter

> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Chilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 31 March 2008 20:53
> To: Dave Stubbs; Peter Miller
> Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass
> 
> In an attempt to avoid this kind of "false tagging for rendering" I have a
> submitted an addition to the mapnik style tonight.
> It will render highway=construction or highway=proposed from z12 upwards.
> It will also render a text label (based on name=) for z13 upwards.
> Jamie's more sophisticated suggestions make sense but are not easily to
> render at the moment. Perhaps we can work towards that time-based approach
> later.
> For now it would make a lot of sense for people to revisit roads under
> construction they have tagged and follow this suggested scheme:
> highway=construction
> construction=foo (motorway, trunk, primary or whatever - if known)
> name=Foo bypass, due to open Dec 08 (or whatever)
> 
> PS: I haven't looked at the file but hope this doesn't throw osmarender
> rules out, which I know picks something up to render construction
> 
> Cheers
> STEVE
> 
>   -Original Message-
>   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dave Stubbs
>   Sent: Mon 3/31/2008 6:03 PM
>   To: Peter Miller
>   Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
>   Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed
> bypass
> 
> 
> 
>   On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Peter Miller
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   >
>   >  Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions:
>   >
>   >  1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously
> (such as
>   >  the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get
> built? I think
>   >  I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways
> agency for
>   >  now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to
> render in
>   >  the mean time).
> 
> 
>   By "tunnel trick" I presume that you mean tag it as a tunnel so that
>   it turns up dotted, despite not being a tunnel, nor ever will be a
>   tunnel?
> 
>   That's not a trick, that's a dirty, dirty hack and should be stomped
> on hard.
> 
>   If you want proposed roads to show up dotted then fix the renderer,
>   don't engage in phantom tagging.
> 
>   ___
>   talk mailing list
>   talk@openstreetmap.org
>   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> 


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Spam] Re: Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Peter Miller]

I have updated the Mottram area to reflect the 'proposed' tagging. Part of
the route is a proposed trunk road and part is a proposed primary road. I
have wrapped the new roads up as a relationship and include a wikipedia
link. I am also possibly testing the outer limits of rendering by including
a proposed tunnel which forms part of the scheme (something which certainly
wasn't possible using the dirty hack!) It isn't re-rendered in mapnik yet
but will be here.
http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.4656&lon=-2.002&zoom=13&layers=B0FT

I have also added information for the A14 Haughley Bends scheme including It
some proposed 'trunk_link' sections and details of the demotion of parts of
the existing carriageways to a tertiary road and a bridleway. It isn't
rendered in mapnik yet.
http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.21342&lon=0.95612&zoom=15&layers=B0FT




Peter

> -Original Message-
> From: Jon Burgess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 31 March 2008 23:31
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: 'Steve Chilton'; 'Dave Stubbs'; 'Talk Openstreetmap'
> Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed
> bypass
> 
> I have deployed Steve's changes and one example which has rendered
> already is the current alterations to M1 J8:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.75704&lon=-
> 0.41518&zoom=16&layers=B0FT
> 
> In the current Mapnik osm.xml file a road will render in the same dashed
> style if it has highway={proposed,construction} regardless of the
> proposed= or construction= tag. In both cases the name= tag will be used
> for the text.
> 
> This construction has recently moved the position of the entry/exit
> roads on the Eastern side of the junction. Someone corrected this data
> earlier this week and the updates are shown already on the Osmarender
> layer.
> 
>   Jon
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 21:48 +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
> > Excellent. Thanks Steve.
> >
> > So how should a proposed road be tagged? Should it be highway=proposed
> > Proposed=trunk Name=foo bypass?
> >
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Steve Chilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 31 March 2008 20:53
> > > To: Dave Stubbs; Peter Miller
> > > Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> > > Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass
> > >
> > > In an attempt to avoid this kind of "false tagging for rendering" I
> have a
> > > submitted an addition to the mapnik style tonight.
> > > It will render highway=construction or highway=proposed from z12
> upwards.
> > > It will also render a text label (based on name=) for z13 upwards.
> > > Jamie's more sophisticated suggestions make sense but are not easily
> to
> > > render at the moment. Perhaps we can work towards that time-based
> approach
> > > later.
> > > For now it would make a lot of sense for people to revisit roads under
> > > construction they have tagged and follow this suggested scheme:
> > > highway=construction
> > > construction=foo (motorway, trunk, primary or whatever - if known)
> > > name=Foo bypass, due to open Dec 08 (or whatever)
> > >
> > > PS: I haven't looked at the file but hope this doesn't throw
> osmarender
> > > rules out, which I know picks something up to render construction
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > STEVE
> > >
> > >   -Original Message-
> > >   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dave Stubbs
> > >   Sent: Mon 3/31/2008 6:03 PM
> > >   To: Peter Miller
> > >   Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> > >   Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed
> > > bypass
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >   On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Peter Miller
> > >   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >   >
> > >   >  Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions:
> > >   >
> > >   >  1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously
> > > (such as
> > >   >  the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get
> > > built? I think
> > >   >  I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways
> > > agency for
> > >   >  now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to
> > > render in
> > >   >  the mean time).
> > >
> > >
> > >   By "tunnel trick" I presume that you mean tag it as 

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Peter Miller]

Ok, so how do I tag a section of highway that is going to be grubbed up and
returned to nature (which is happening for short sections of the A14 at
Haughley Bends)?

I am currently using the following coding:

highway="trunk"
construction="disused"


Does that seem ok?



Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: Jon Burgess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 31 March 2008 23:31
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: 'Steve Chilton'; 'Dave Stubbs'; 'Talk Openstreetmap'
> Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed
> bypass
> 
> I have deployed Steve's changes and one example which has rendered
> already is the current alterations to M1 J8:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.75704&lon=-
> 0.41518&zoom=16&layers=B0FT
> 
> In the current Mapnik osm.xml file a road will render in the same dashed
> style if it has highway={proposed,construction} regardless of the
> proposed= or construction= tag. In both cases the name= tag will be used
> for the text.
> 
> This construction has recently moved the position of the entry/exit
> roads on the Eastern side of the junction. Someone corrected this data
> earlier this week and the updates are shown already on the Osmarender
> layer.
> 
>   Jon
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 21:48 +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
> > Excellent. Thanks Steve.
> >
> > So how should a proposed road be tagged? Should it be highway=proposed
> > Proposed=trunk Name=foo bypass?
> >
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Steve Chilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 31 March 2008 20:53
> > > To: Dave Stubbs; Peter Miller
> > > Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> > > Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass
> > >
> > > In an attempt to avoid this kind of "false tagging for rendering" I
> have a
> > > submitted an addition to the mapnik style tonight.
> > > It will render highway=construction or highway=proposed from z12
> upwards.
> > > It will also render a text label (based on name=) for z13 upwards.
> > > Jamie's more sophisticated suggestions make sense but are not easily
> to
> > > render at the moment. Perhaps we can work towards that time-based
> approach
> > > later.
> > > For now it would make a lot of sense for people to revisit roads under
> > > construction they have tagged and follow this suggested scheme:
> > > highway=construction
> > > construction=foo (motorway, trunk, primary or whatever - if known)
> > > name=Foo bypass, due to open Dec 08 (or whatever)
> > >
> > > PS: I haven't looked at the file but hope this doesn't throw
> osmarender
> > > rules out, which I know picks something up to render construction
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > STEVE
> > >
> > >   -Original Message-
> > >   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dave Stubbs
> > >   Sent: Mon 3/31/2008 6:03 PM
> > >   To: Peter Miller
> > >   Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> > >   Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed
> > > bypass
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >   On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Peter Miller
> > >   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >   >
> > >   >  Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions:
> > >   >
> > >   >  1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously
> > > (such as
> > >   >  the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get
> > > built? I think
> > >   >  I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways
> > > agency for
> > >   >  now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to
> > > render in
> > >   >  the mean time).
> > >
> > >
> > >   By "tunnel trick" I presume that you mean tag it as a tunnel so that
> > >   it turns up dotted, despite not being a tunnel, nor ever will be a
> > >   tunnel?
> > >
> > >   That's not a trick, that's a dirty, dirty hack and should be stomped
> > > on hard.
> > >
> > >   If you want proposed roads to show up dotted then fix the renderer,
> > >   don't engage in phantom tagging.
> > >
> > >   ___
> > >   talk mailing list
> > >   talk@openstreetmap.org
> > >   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> > >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] welcome to user 30,001!

[Peter Miller]

 

At this moment we have just welcomed out 30,001st registered OSM user.

 

The user base has doubled in the past 150 days and gone up by four in the
past 300 days or thereabouts.

 

Not a bad growth rate really.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

 

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?

[Peter Miller]

I started cleaning up around the San Francisco area a week ago in
preparation for the Where 2.0 conference (Burlingame:  May 12th- 14th) and
WhereCamp (Mountain View: May 17th - 18th ).

 

I have found that a lot can be done from a distance using only tiger data
and the yahoo photography. So far I have focused work onto the coastline,
the airport the freeways and then on Foster
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.5452&lon=-122.2566&zoom=14&layers=0BFT>
City (near Burlingame) and the area around the GooglePlex
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.42511&lon=-122.08164&zoom=15&layers=0BFT>
.

 

The Freeways need someone with experience because currently the tiger data
is single carriageway and it needs to be expanded to dual carriageway. I
have found the best way is to first add another carriageway using Potlatch
linking the new carriageway into all the entrances and exits along the way
and then snip off the last sections of entrances and exits to the far
carriageway using JOSM (I don't know how to do that bit in Potlatch).

 

The other area where experience and confidence helps is where there is data
that predates the tiger and to decide what to keep and what to delete. In
some areas the freeways have already been entered as dual-carriageways so it
can make sense to keep them and deleted the tiger data, but in most other
situations the tiger data is likely to be better because it will link to all
the side roads.

 

Does anyone else feel like joining me? I would suggest that the initial
focus is the area to the west of San Francisco Bay between San Francisco
itself and Sunnyvale. Just choose a random spot to start and work outwards
and let's see how it goes. For anyone who hasn't tried it yet, rectifying
Tiger data is more compulsive that Sudoku! 

 

Btw, if anyone knows what is going on in the
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.4244&lon=-122.0301&zoom=13&layers=B0FT>
bay just north of Mountain View and the Googleplex then please do some
suitable tagging. There seem to be loads of shallow ponds with weird colours
(particularly weird on google
<http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&t=k&ll=37.459735,-122.028065&spn=0.067586
,0.141964&z=13>  aerial photography). I have tagged them as 'natural' and
'water' but I don't think it is really natural and it might not even be
water!

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?

[Peter Miller]

Good detective work Andy.

So... is there a tag for salt flats and what colour would it be rendered as
if there was one, or should one argue that there is water involved (if a bit
salty) and so natural=water is ok.

I think I will add a note to a few of the ponds that say that they are salt
flats and leave it to others to finesse the tagging later.


Regards,



Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12 April 2008 11:28
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?
> 
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Peter Miller
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Btw, if anyone knows what is going on in the bay just north of Mountain
> View
> > and the Googleplex then please do some suitable tagging. There seem to
> be
> > loads of shallow ponds with weird colours (particularly weird on google
> > aerial photography). I have tagged them as 'natural' and 'water' but I
> don't
> > think it is really natural and it might not even be water!
> 
> Using the flickr maps thingy, it appears to be some Salt Flats as per
> http://flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/117376408
> 
> Cheers,
> Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?

[Peter Miller]

Steve has pointed out to me that there is a real mapping party in San
Francisco next weekend which is great.

I still think that there is a lot of value in encouraging 'virtual' team
alongside physical one especially for the USA where the availability of
Tiger and Imagery data allows a lot of work to be done remotely alongside a
smaller team in the place itself.

I will add my name to the list of attendees for the San Francisco meeting,
making it clear that I will be remote. Possibly you could create a 'jobs
list', some of which can be done remotely, on the party page and see if
people sign up to take them on.

I have a few specific questions/observations based on the work I have done
so far.

1) The rail network data in the area seems very fragmentary. It may be
valuable for someone with good local knowledge to concentrate on that bit.

2) I have cleaned up and completed the BART network. I have tagged it
'subway' which may not be ideal, possibly 'metro' would be better. I am also
not clear if it shares track with Union Pacific through Oakland down to
Hayward. Also, if I say the subway is in a tunnel it is not rendered at all
in Osmarender. Currently it is tagged with layer=-1 without a tunnel tag for
the underground bits. Feel free to improve what I have done.

3) The runways and taxiways for small airports are too wide when viewed
close up using osmarender. Check out the airport near Foster City as an
example.

4) Nearly all the tiger roads are tagged as 'residential' by default. It
would be very useful to have a mapping of terminology between US names
'interstate' etc, and the OSM ones. I assume 'motorway' = 'interstate'. How
should 'trunk' be interpreted for the USA? What about Primary, secondary
etc?. I suggest that you folk update the map features with your
recommendations and ensure consistency across the USA.

5) At some stage I guess we will have a renderer that will using different
colour schemes for the road hierarchy for different countries to follow
local custom (Interstate shouldn't be blue for example) but that is not a
data collection issue.




See you Saturday :)




Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: SteveC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12 April 2008 20:34
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?
> 
> 
> On 12 Apr 2008, at 02:00, Peter Miller wrote:
> > I started cleaning up around the San Francisco area a week ago in
> > preparation for the Where 2.0 conference (Burlingame:  May 12th-
> > 14th) and WhereCamp (Mountain View: May 17th - 18th ).
> 
> ...and the mapping party next Staurday?
> 
> I've been putting the word out and trying to get the data in from
> people here.
> 
> > Does anyone else feel like joining me? I would suggest that the
> > initial focus is the area to the west of San Francisco Bay between
> > San Francisco itself and Sunnyvale. Just choose a random spot to
> > start and work outwards and let's see how it goes. For anyone who
> > hasn't tried it yet, rectifying Tiger data is more compulsive that
> > Sudoku!
> 
> I've been doing exactly this, but potlatch is really pissing me off
> because you have to be so precise when moving nodes about and adding
> nodes to ways, you often just drag the map and not a node. I've asked
> richard for a 'double width' node and way mode. I don't think potlatch
> has been used extensively in this way - fixing lots of existing crap
> data - before.
> 
> > Btw, if anyone knows what is going on in the bay just north of
> > Mountain View and the Googleplex then please do some suitable
> > tagging. There seem to be
> 
> I'm around there right now if there is anything else specific you need
> done.
> 
> Best
> 
> Steve


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?

[Peter Miller]

Thanks for the feedback. Regarding road classifications can I suggest the
following:

 

OSM uses six levels of highway classification for roads for motorised
vehicles going from motorway at the top to unclassified at the bottom. You
could then add byways and bridleways and footpaths to this list but let's
not do that for now.

 

International standards such as GDF also have road classes. Their top one is
called 'main road' and then classes 1-9 in descending order. In GDF these
are called 'National Road Class' to keep the naming of these levels open for
local interpretation. The important thing is that main road is the most
important and class 9 is the least important. Lets refer to the top class as
0 (rather than main road).

 

As you know in the UK these classes are currently encoded using the UK road
classification systems for historical reasons.

 

A problem for the USA and other countries is that the rendering of these
roads is also currently based only on UK practice, so the most important
roads (class 0) are blue, whereas in the US they should be orange. The next
level down is rendered by OSM as green whereas for the US it should be
yellow etc.

 

I notice from current San Francisco mapping that a number of roads a tagged
as 'secondary' which then renders as a comfortable orange colour which
probably makes the US maps look better to local eyes even though in the
class system this is a class 3 road.

 

It seems important therefore to render roads appropriately in each country.
For the UAS I think we need Mapnik and osmarender to render class 0 roads
(tagged as motorways in OSM) as orange in the USA and blue in the UK and
possibly other colours on a national basis. Class 1 roads (tagged as trunk)
also as orange? Then class 2 (tagged as primary) and Class 3 (tagged as
secondary) as yellow. Other classes could be white. Whatever the choice I
think we need a table to relate road class (0-9) to the names various
countries to colours in various countries. 

 

 

Does that make sense?

 

If we don't do this then mappers will be tempted to tag to get the right
visual appearance, rather than the rather classification.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

  _  

From: Karl Newman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 14 April 2008 16:09
To: Peter Miller
Cc: SteveC; Talk Openstreetmap; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] virtual san francisco mapping party?

 

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

 


I have a few specific questions/observations based on the work I have done
so far.


1) The rail network data in the area seems very fragmentary. It may be
valuable for someone with good local knowledge to concentrate on that bit.


Welcome to public transit in the Bay Area. The real system is very
fragmentary with poor coverage... 
 


2) I have cleaned up and completed the BART network. I have tagged it
'subway' which may not be ideal, possibly 'metro' would be better. I am also
not clear if it shares track with Union Pacific through Oakland down to
Hayward. Also, if I say the subway is in a tunnel it is not rendered at all
in Osmarender. Currently it is tagged with layer=-1 without a tunnel tag for
the underground bits. Feel free to improve what I have done.


I agree, "metro" or equivalent would be better. It's really only a subway in
downtown Oakland and SF, and obviously in the trans-bay tube. I'm nearly
100% positive that it doesn't share track with UP. I think it has its own
gauge and everything.



4) Nearly all the tiger roads are tagged as 'residential' by default. It
would be very useful to have a mapping of terminology between US names
'interstate' etc, and the OSM ones. I assume 'motorway' = 'interstate'. How
should 'trunk' be interpreted for the USA? What about Primary, secondary
etc?. I suggest that you folk update the map features with your
recommendations and ensure consistency across the USA.


There has been a bit of discussion about this, but there doesn't seem to be
any agreement and the Wiki is a mess with regards to this, with conflicting
information on various pages. Part of the problem comes from us poor US
residents trying to map our road system to the UK/European standard where
many of us have not spent a lot of time (or in my case, I didn't pay
attention to the road classifications). I would say in general,
interstate=motorway, US highway=trunk or primary (or maybe motorway in
certain cases), state highway=primary or secondary, county highway=secondary
or tertiary, road through commercial district=unclassified, and
residential=residential :-)


Karl

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and elsewhere

[Peter Miller]

It would be good to get a resolution of the issue of highway classification
and rendering in the USA.

 

The San Francisco area is getting into a pretty
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.3792&lon=-121.9487&zoom=12&layers=0BFT>
good state now, and could act as an 'exemplar' area for the USA should good
tagging practice, however the current highway tagging and rendering is a
mess and also looks wrong on the final map.

 

 I realise a bunch of you are meeting tomorrow in San Francisco for a
mapping party tomorrow so though I would chuck in my thoughts first.

 

 

 

The interstate roads are currently tagged 'motorway' and rendered blue.

 

The state roads are currently tagged on OSM variously with trunk (green)
primary (red) and secondary (orange). Some pretty major roads a tagged with
secondary (actually a very lowly road class in the UK below motorway, trunk
and primary) and I suspect that this is because it renders with the correct
colour. There is no 'secondary_link' tag for exit and entrance ramps because
secondary roads are too minor to have such things so highways rendered as
secondary are using 'secondary' tags for exist and entrance ramps as well.

 

With the current rendering people will be tempted to tag major roads as
'secondary' and get everthing into a bit of mess although others will insist
on using the hierarchy correctly and ignore the non-standard colour of the
resulting map.

 

 

Can I propose the following:

 

Interstate should be tagged 'motorway' and be rendered orange with a rather
grand rendering of the route number as on Google maps and on other US maps.

 

Major non-interstate highways that have traffic light free multi-level
junctions etc should be tagged as 'trunk' and possibly also be rendered
orange but with less grand route numbers to differentiate them from
interstate routes.

 

Major routes with multi lane traffic (2+lanes in each direction) but which
stop for traffic signals and have random side roads coming in frequently are
tagged 'primary' and should appear yellow and be reasonable wide.

 

Secondary and tertiary and then available for lower tiers and should appear
as yellow but be narrower.

 

If we can agree on the rendering rules and get both Mapnik and osmarender
sorted out for the USA then people will be incentivised to tag
appropriately. The moto 'render and they will come' probably applies here as
elsewhere.

 

Can I suggest that you do some block changes to the highways tags over the
weekend to get the tags right and (of course the colours will then be wrong)
ie top roads motorway/motorway_link=blue, next level trunk/trunk_link=green,
next level primary/primary_link=red and finally secondary=orange and
tertiary=yellow and then ensure that the rendering rules get sorted for
osmarender and mapnik .

 

Btw, I am not on the talk-us list. I will look and he USA list on the web
from time to time but so do include me in any relevant responses. I am
copying this to the main list because I suspect the issue also applies to
other countries around the world.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and elsewhere

[Peter Miller]

I hope I didn't come across as aggressive, but I did want to point out some
really weird inconsistencies that do need to be resolved and wanted to
encourage debate. In the UK a secondary roads is a minor road, in San
Francisco this
<http://maps.yahoo.com/#mvt=s&lat=37.668663&lon=-122.485307&zoom=18>
junction (a multilevel road with multiple flyovers) is classed as secondary
whereas this
<http://maps.yahoo.com/#mvt=s&lat=37.428439&lon=-121.909597&zoom=19>  one
(an urban road with traffic signal controlled junctions) is classed as
primary.

 

I suspect that fact reason that the first is classed as secondary is because
the mapper wanted an orange road and that it should really be a 'trunk'
road.

 

I really don't mind what the rendered colours are, that is for local
discussion and there may even be multiple versions with different styles as
far as I am concernedm, but currently the rendering is uk-centric and that
seems inappropriate for the USA and seems to be causing distortions with
tagging.

 

I do think that the hierarchy of road classes needs to be respected across
OSM (where a trunk road is more important than primary road than secondary
road etc) allowing a routing engine to direct drivers worldwide onto the
main routes (and also possibly keep pedestrians and cyclists off them). I do
think that the '_link' element needs to be used to help sat-nav systems give
meaningful instructions and not give out information about turning onto link
roads when it should say 'turn onto Highway 101'. I do think the description
of the highway road classes in Map Features needs to be internationalised to
allow people in new countries to chose the right mapping to their own
infrastructure and naming and colour conventions.

 

Personally I hope that San Francisco will prove a useful test case where
many of the outstanding internationalisation issues can be bottomed out
before there before large scale tagging across many other parts of the
country.

 

Currently everything except interstate is tagged as 'residential'. If it was
agreed that state highways should be 'trunk' roads then would it be sensible
to design a 'bot' to scan un-touched tiger data for road names including the
word 'state' but not the word 'interstate' and automatically update the tags
from 'highway=residential' to 'highway=trunk' (or whatever is agreed).

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

> -Original Message-

> From: Andy Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> Sent: 18 April 2008 17:38

> To: Peter Miller

> Cc: Talk Openstreetmap

> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and

> elsewhere

> 

> > If we can agree on the rendering rules and get both Mapnik and

> osmarender

> > sorted out for the USA

> 

> "sorted out" - they both work fine. Even if we had a production-ready

> mechanism for country-specific rendering, it would still be a matter

> of opinion, or more accurately, a matter of cartographic style, as to

> whether we want to render the freeways in orange. After all, it's just

> a map, and conventions are only conventions, not hard and fast rules.

> 

> Not saying that we shouldn't, just that your phrasing is quite

> aggressive for what is a matter of taste. I wouldn't want someone to

> say that my choice of colours for the cycle map contours needs

> "sorting out" (even if that might well be true!).

> 

> Cheers,

> Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and elsewhere

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:44:49 -0400
> From: "Adam Schreiber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and
>   elsewhere
> To: "Tom Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  The problem is that we do not have the technology to render different
> >  countries in different ways. I don't believe we even know of an
> efficient
> >  way to do it, so we don't even know what the technology would look like
> >  should somebody want to write it.
> 
> Shouldn't this be as easy as adding a tag indicating country and
> altering the stylesheet to say highway=motorway country=us =>
> color=yellow, highway=motorway country=uk => color=blue?
>

I think tagging each way with the country puts huge additional work onto
every mapper. We should have boundaries for countries from somewhere I
believe, and that will provide the national context for default rendering.
Possibly it is not achievable immediately, but I suggest we need to solve it
and ensure the integrity of the tagging in the meantime.

As to the question about 'who decides on the actual rendering' I am not
personally sure and it may require a bit of a benevolent dictator role in
the end, however if the core tagging is clear and consistent across OSM
then anyone is free to do their own rendering.

To answer the question about who chose blue for motorways. That is a
standard across road-maps in the UK that was possibly defined with motorways
were first build in the UK. I have a UK road atlas from 1976 that has the
motorways in blue. I guess that red was used for the most important roads
(being a bright colour) with a tone spreading from yellow through orange to
red before motorways and then when someone invented a new more important one
a new colour was needed. The answer is that OSM's currently colour scheme
seems to be that it is UK imperialism!

For interest, here are some colours using by Google maps around the world
for motorways or their local equitant.

Orange: USA, Canada, Germany, Russia, India, China
Red: Australia, France
Blue: UK


And for Yahoo

Red: USA, France, Russia
Orange: India
Blue: UK

And for Microsoft (local.live)

Green: France
Orange: UK, India, China
Yellow: Russia


So actually it is all a bit fluid and variable, but I still think a table
for colours by county makes sense unless someone wants to get agreement on a
single colour.

I would suggest we have a default of orange for top-level roads everywhere
with a local override which is blue for the UK and other countries can
debate what they want would be idea.

In the mean time please can we strongly encourage consistent tagging of
highways everywhere.

Regards,



Peter
 
> Cheers,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] BBC: Villages 'discovered' in DR Congo

[Peter Miller]

> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:13:12 +0100
> From: Matt Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [OSM-talk] BBC: Villages 'discovered' in DR Congo
> To: talk 
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> It seems the DR Congo has been mapping their villages using GPS devices
> since
> traditional mapping methods are made difficult by the thick forest. See
> the
> BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7355335.stm.
> 
> Compare their map
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/africa_enl_1208537563/htm
> l/1.stm
> to our's at present
> http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=-2.017&lon=17.117&zoom=9&layers=B0FT.
> 
> Does anyone have any more information about this?
> 
> Regards,
> Matt Williams

Fyi, I saw the article earlier this evening and have already emailed someone
in the oganisation to tell them about OSM and ask if we can help them or if
they can provide their data to us for someone  in our community to enter on
their behalf.

Regards,


Peter



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and elsewhere

[Peter Miller]

Thanks for that Jeffrey. I agree entirely that rendering should follow
tagging and not lead tagging, my main concern at the moment is that UK
rendering (blue for motorway and orange for secondary) is encouraging
inappropriate tagging. I think we agree that one should clarify first how to
tag what is on the ground and then decide on how to render the data. Based
in the UK I am reliant on tiger and aerial photography to inform my choice
of tagging Am I right in thinking that the synthesis of this discussion is
being added to this wiki page?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Highway_tag_usage

 

Fyi I have been doing a lot of work on the San Francisco bay area (Golden
Gate down to Foster City) over the past week or so and I am having been
working on the road classes tags today, hence my question. I have been:

 

Lifting the road class of roads tagged as secondary but which have flyovers
and divided carriageways etc and making them trunk (but motorway might be
more appropriate)

 

Lifting 'braded roads' with two carriageways in tiger data from residential
to primary.

 

Lifting some other roads from residential to secondary where they are
clearly significant feeder roads for an area.

 

Rationalising link roads to get them to match the class of road they are
feeding (there were lots of motorway_link roads feeding secondary for
example).

 

My first pass looked pretty ugly. I am currently waiting for osmarender to
render my latest adjustment to the primary network in the area and would
then be grateful for feedback as to whether I am on the right lines (but do
wait until tomorrow when the rendering should have finished).

 

I have also being doing a lot of 'de-duplicating' of roads pre/post tiger.
In general I have kept pre-tiger freeways and kept tiger for other roads. I
have also given a pass over most of the freeway network in the bay area in
the past week and have added the second carriageways where required and
cleaned up the geometry and sorted out some of the junctions.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

 

  _  

From: Jeffrey Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 20 April 2008 15:42
To: Peter Miller
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] tagging and rendering highways in the USA and
elsewhere

 

 

On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

 

Major non-interstate highways that have traffic light free multi-level
junctions etc should be tagged as 'trunk' and possibly also be rendered
orange but with less grand route numbers to differentiate them from
interstate routes.

This statement really bothers me. First, we must make every effort to keep
the data separate
from the rendering.

Consider a section of Interstate Highway that structurally resembles a UK
motorway. This section of road may also be part of a state highway. It's not
uncommon for a section of
road to have both a state highway sign and an Interstate sign. In some very
barren
areas an Interstate may have standard intersections without ramps. As in
your example above a road that is not an Interstate may have multiple levels
and ramps.

Whatever scheme we agree on must keep the road's structure separate from
legal classifications. I checked and the wiki still says that the highway
tag should be
used to indicate what the road looks like. My reasoning can be found on the
talk page.

Whether a road is an Interstate, state highway, county road, etc. should be
indicated in another data field.

I haven't been following all the conversations lately, but I remember an
Australian
was tagging a gravel road as a motorway because it was the main road between
two rural cities and he wanted it prominently rendered. Perhaps in this case
some
kind of importance tag should be used.

I think free tagging is great, but we should not allow multiple definitions
for each tag.
A tag should not indicate both it's legal status and it's structure,
although one might
imply the other under certain circumstances.

-- 
http://bowlad.com 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Highway tagging in the USA

[Peter Miller]

I thought it might be useful to have a concrete (literally) example of USA
tagging to talk about. So.. think I have tagged the highways from San
Francisco down to San Jose as described on the highway tagging page, with a
few exceptions. My reference was the international section of the highway
tag article:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Highway_tag_usage#International_equi
valence

 

The exceptions are as follows:

 

1) I upgraded the Golden Gate Bridge from primary to trunk, but I think it
should be motorway because it has ramp-only access.

 

2) I upgraded most of the 'braided' highways in the San Francisco area and
other main arteries further south to primary. Some of the ones I coded as
primary in the San Francisco area have now been retagged as tertiary. I have
sent am email to the author of these changes to see if the motivation is to
get the roads to render yellow or if I have missed something.

 

3) IThere are many roads that are currently still tagged as residential
which should probably be tertiary, secondary or primary and there are of
course many areas of grey between primary, secondary and tertiary, however I
think it would be good to get some feedback and discussion first. Could
people take a look and see if I have got it about right and suggest or
execute changes where required.

 

Also. please could someone to a 'trial render' of the area using one or more
potential 'USA friendly' colour schemes so we can see what it would look
like. Personally I would be interested in something along these lines:

 

Orange and wide: Motoroway/trunk

Yellow and wide: Primary

Yellow at narrow: secondary

Fainted yellow and narrow: tertiary

 

Could this be done off-line and then posted as an image on the wiki for
discussion? Could anyone have a go at this?

 

Btw, I have been copying some emails from talk onto talk-us over the past
few days but they haven't made it onto the list, not sure why. Possibly it
was because I was not a member of the list (which I now am).

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Ito

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Highway tagging in the USA

[Peter Miller]

Possibly I am pushing a non-issue but personally I find the red overpowering
in a grid system and I have no other explanation as to why so many major
roads are getting tagged as tertiary and secondary.

Autually, I guess another explanation might be because many of the US
highways were tagged as secondary by default on import (with motorway-link
ramps).

Incidentally would it be possibly to design a 'tiger-bot' that went looking
for roads tagged as secondary, are 'separated' and had not been touched
since initial import and retagged them automatically as motorway? This would
of course need consensus but might save a lot of work, but I think the only
roads that fit this condition are really motorways.



Thanks,



Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: David Earl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 21 April 2008 20:21
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Talk Openstreetmap'
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Highway tagging in the USA
> 
> On 21/04/2008 19:46, Peter Miller wrote:
> > Also. please could someone to a 'trial render' of the area using one or
> > more potential 'USA friendly' colour schemes so we can see what it would
> > look like. Personally I would be interested in something along these
> lines:
> >
> > Orange and wide: Motoroway/trunk
> >
> > Yellow and wide: Primary
> >
> > Yellow at narrow: secondary
> >
> > Fainted yellow and narrow: tertiary
> 
> Curious that you say these are 'USA friendly' colors. I have in front of
> me a Rand-McNally road map of the US, bought and published in the US,
> and the key is as follows:
> 
> Free limited access highway: purplish blue with red casement
> 
> Toll limited access highway: light green with dark green casement
> 
> Other four lane divided highway: yellow with red casement
> 
> Principal highway (mostly used for wider non-divided state highways in
> practice): wide pink (no special casement)
> 
> Other through highway: narrow pink (no special casement)
> 
> Other road: narrow purple
> 
> Unpaved road: white with gray casement (though so small it just appears
> as a gray line really).
> 
> On the inset street-level maps, they carry this through, and in
> addition, show principal urban streets as gray
> 
> They also have some central area maps for some cities where they show
> every street. In these, the principal urban streets are now pink and the
> minor (residential) streets are gray. The big highways are as per the
> main map, though we get to see individual carriageways and junction
> arrangements at that scale.
> 
> The Golden Gate bridge is apparently tolled, so it is shown in the
> second category.
> 
> David


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Highway tagging in the USA

[Peter Miller]

Ok I get the message re colours...

The question for the US at the moment then is how the define the OSM
hierarchy of road classes in a US context. The current tagging rules seem to
leap from trunk or motorway directly to tertiary. As a Brit I will stay out
of that discussion but will check to ensure that I can understand the
resulting rules and that they seem to work.

I do think we should consider retagging all the major routes (motorways or
trunk routes - to be advised) that were originally tagged as secondary in
the tiger import (but which have motorway-link tagged ramps). Otherwise we
are expecting Newbies in an area to immediately start retagging what is
there which might be seen as a bit alarming.


Regards,




Peter



> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Robinson (blackadder) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 23 April 2008 09:23
> To: 'David Earl'; 'Peter Miller'
> Cc: 'Talk Openstreetmap'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Highway tagging in the USA
> 
> David Earl wrote:
> >Sent: 21 April 2008 8:21 PM
> >To: Peter Miller
> >Cc: 'Talk Openstreetmap'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Highway tagging in the USA
> >
> >On 21/04/2008 19:46, Peter Miller wrote:
> >> Also. please could someone to a 'trial render' of the area using one or
> >> more potential 'USA friendly' colour schemes so we can see what it
> would
> >> look like. Personally I would be interested in something along these
> >lines:
> >>
> >> Orange and wide: Motoroway/trunk
> >>
> >> Yellow and wide: Primary
> >>
> >> Yellow at narrow: secondary
> >>
> >> Fainted yellow and narrow: tertiary
> >
> >Curious that you say these are 'USA friendly' colors. I have in front of
> >me a Rand-McNally road map of the US, bought and published in the US,
> >and the key is as follows:
> 
> Seems we have the same map, although mine was produced in the UK by
> Collins
> in Association with Rand McNally. But anyway, looking at other Rand
> McNally
> state maps they all seem to use the same colour scheme that you describe.
> 
> As with most countries you find different colour schemes used by different
> map producers. For instance, a couple of other CA/SF maps I have show:
> 
> Hertz (Produced by Colour-Art Inc) uses:
> Freeways: Dark Green with black casing
> Tolled: Yellow with black casing
> Other 4 lane divided highways. Thin red
> Everything else: Thin grey
> 
> H.M. Gousha uses:
> Freeways: Bluish red with black casing
> Tolled: Bluish red with black casing
> Other 4 lane divided highways. Orange with black casing
> Everything else: Thick black (thin black in urban areas)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Bus Stops

[Peter Miller]

The EU standard Transmodel defines a Stop Point as 'A POINT where passengers
can board or alight from vehicles'. For bus stops this means a single pole,
shelter etc and for a place where there are three poles for different
services close together then there would be three entries.

There are also places where buses stop where there is no physical
infrastructure but where buses stop which also need Stop Points. In rural
areas there might be a pole on one side of the road but buses stop in both
directions, or in some places there is not infrastructure on either side of
the road.

For there are a number of Stop Points close to each other then these can be
grouped into Stop Areas that are 'A group of STOP POINTs close to each
other'. I suggest that we achieve this with a relationship call a 'Stop
Area' is people are keen to model it.

For railway stations it can get more complicated as a platform can be made
up of sub platforms (long trains stop at platform 4 and two short ones can
stop at 4A and 4B etc). In this case I believe there should be a Stop Point
for 4, 4A and 4B.
http://www.transmodel.org/en/transmodel/gloss/s.htm

This interpretation is now being discussed as ISO level so is probably the
one to go with.

Are we agreed that this is the appropriate interpretation for the feature
going forward. In which case shall I add this clarification and
interpretation to the relevant OSM tag page?

Btw, Someone might like to ask the DfT in the UK at some point for a copy of
the DB they have with the location of over 350,000 bus stops with their
names and the name of the associated street. I know the people but it might
be better if it came from someone else, possibly from the foundation?



Regards,




Peter


> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:03:14 +0900
> From: "Jeffrey Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops
> To: "Mike Collinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> How am I supposed to do bus stops?
> If two bus stops are on opposite sides of the road then I think maybe they
> can share a node?
> 
> I found in some email that you can make little short service links. I
> don't
> like that. The bus
> pulls over to the side of the road where I'm at.
> 
> Sometimes they aren't exactly across the street from each other.
> 
> Where I'm at there are lots of wood and concrete bus shelters.
> 
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 12:07 AM, Mike Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >  Excellent background information for basing our models. Thank you
> Peter.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > At 07:21 AM 11/08/2007, Peter Miller wrote:
> >
> > The conventional way of handling Bus Stops in the public transport
> > industry is to have a node for each individual point at which one can
> get on
> > a vehicle, so if there are two bus stops on opposite sides of the road
> then
> > they are represented as two nodes. If there are three bays in a row on
> one
> > side of the road then they are represented a 3 nodes in a row. Every Bus
> > Stop in the UK has a unique code, and this is sometimes printed on the
> bus
> > stop itself.
> >
> > In the EU standards they are called 'Stop Points' (rather than Bus
> Stops)
> > so they can cover buses, tram, rail, ferry planes etc.
> >
> > In railway stations there is a Stop Point for each Platform (and each
> bay
> > in a bus station, each Gate for an Airport and each quay in a Ferry
> > terminal).
> >
> > Groups of local Stop Points (as they are called) are then arranged into
> > Stop Areas where they are very close to each other.
> >
> > These Stop Points are not within the road layer because Stop Points are
> a
> > distinct dataset managed separately; they are then associated with a
> street,
> > sometimes using the Street Name and sometimes based on proximity.
> >
> > I recommend that we use 'Bus Stop' and 'Stop Point' for this low-level
> > purpose and construct entities as we need them.
> >
> > The database of all these points in the UK is called 'NaPTAN' (standing
> > for 'National Public Transport Access Nodes'), there are about 350,000
> of
> > them, and keen people can find additional information here:
> > http://www.naptan.org.uk/
> >
> >
> > A new CEN standard is in the process of being ratified, called IFOPT
> which
> > can be used for describe much more complex transport interchanges, such
> as
> > major airports and railways stations, detailing every cor

Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops

[Peter Miller]

Comments in line

> -Original Message-
> From: Shaun McDonald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 24 April 2008 00:22
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops
> 
> 
> On 23 Apr 2008, at 17:45, Peter Miller wrote:
> 
> > The EU standard Transmodel defines a Stop Point as 'A POINT where
> > passengers
> > can board or alight from vehicles'. For bus stops this means a
> > single pole,
> > shelter etc and for a place where there are three poles for different
> > services close together then there would be three entries.
> >
> > There are also places where buses stop where there is no physical
> > infrastructure but where buses stop which also need Stop Points. In
> > rural
> > areas there might be a pole on one side of the road but buses stop
> > in both
> > directions, or in some places there is not infrastructure on either
> > side of
> > the road.
> >
> > For there are a number of Stop Points close to each other then these
> > can be
> > grouped into Stop Areas that are 'A group of STOP POINTs close to each
> > other'. I suggest that we achieve this with a relationship call a
> > 'Stop
> > Area' is people are keen to model it.
> >
> 
> I know that Google models the bus stops as being on either side of the
> road. Personally, I believe that it is better to have one node per bus
> stop, even if they are close together in each direction.
> 

To be clear, are you saying that Google say that in the case of two bus
stops nearly opposite each other on either sides of the road then these
should be encoded as two separate entities? If so they are equivalent to a
Transmodel Stop Point. Personally I didn't find Google's description too
clear on the matter and I suspect that there may be some data suppliers who
interpret the GT stop concept as a Stop Point (two separate entities) and
other data suppliers who will interpret it as a Stop Area (one entity). 
http://code.google.com/transit/spec/transit_feed_specification.html

There are debates on the GT email group at the moment about how to code
station entrances and stop Points that are distant from the road etc so
their data model is still evolving and is probably not as good a reference
for us as the EU standards which worked this out 10 years ago.

> There is also a hailer zone, where there are no bus stops
> specifically. The driver just stops where it is safe to do so and
> passengers need to get on and off.
>

Sure, it would make sense to define a Hail and Ride section as being part of
a length of road as an attribute of the road, although one would need to
allow for the case where it was only buses in one direction that stopped.
Hail and Ride is always the delinquent 'awkward' child in the mix, and will
require special attention. In the UK standards there would be one notional
Stop Point for each direction for a hail-and-ride section.
 
> > For railway stations it can get more complicated as a platform can
> > be made
> > up of sub platforms (long trains stop at platform 4 and two short
> > ones can
> > stop at 4A and 4B etc). In this case I believe there should be a
> > Stop Point
> > for 4, 4A and 4B.
> > http://www.transmodel.org/en/transmodel/gloss/s.htm
> >
> 
> Train platforms are so long that I think that they should be modeled
> as a way parallel to the railway line as rail=platform. I have done
> this for Stirling Station, and Edinburgh Park in West Edinburgh, if I
> remember correctly. This also means that you can model how you get on
> to and from the station platforms. It's all very well seeing a station
> there as a dot, but at high zoom you need to know how to get there
> from the surrounding roads.
> 

Agreed. In the EU model there is a distinction between the logical 'Stop
Point' (a point feature) and the physical platform (an area) and the track
(a line). There would be a logical Stop Points that would be used within the
schedules (relating to platform 4, 4A and 4B in my example), and this will
separately be associated with a physical bit of the world (a platform). One
platform can of course also serve two separate 'tracks'. There may also be
one or more Boarding Points associated with the platform associated with
where to stand to enter the train through a particular door for one's booked
seat. As I mentioned in an earlier post the physical design of the station
is described in the IFOPT standard. Incidentally platforms are called Quays
for ferry services and are similar to Gates in airports. In the EU standard
they are all of these are called Quays.
http://www.naptan.org.uk/ifopt/

I am interesting in the idea of how OSM might model larg

Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops

[Peter Miller]

The GDF standard has a very useful 'is associated with' relation, so one
could say the bus stop (and the letter box etc) are associated with the road
element.

The UK Bus Stops database is separate from the roads layer (so people can
use OS/Navteq/TeleAtlas or even OSM!) and the bus stop DB entry has a
compulsory field for the name of the road and also a bearing field which is
in the direction the bus will leave the bus stop.

Given that we are a combined dataset I would recommend this problem is
either left to the data user (to snap bus stops to the nearest road and to
know if people drive on the left/right or if the road is a one way street
etc to get the direction) or to optional provide a relation to associate the
stop with the Way or add a compass direction.

I would strongly discourage the adding of 'fake' footpaths which don't
relate to physical stuff.

Wth regard to stop naming bus stops in the UK have the following

A 'Common Name' (for example 'Trafalgar Sq')
An 'Identifier' (for example Stand/Bay P)
A 'Bearing' (for example SW)
A 'Street' (for example The Strand)

I recommend that we use adopt the Common Name/Identified field because it
allows a general name to be used on a specific. For example get off at
'Trafalgar Sq' or a specific one for local consumption: your bus goes from
Stand P.

I agree that in the case of a road with a shelter on one side of the street
and a simple pole, or indeed nothing on the other then there should be a Bus
Stop identified on both sides with appropriate attributes about the
construction and facilities.

With regards to the services that use the stop I believe these should be
kept separate from the description of the fixed infrastructure which should
define exactly that. Schedules should form a separate layer or indeed
project, Open Timetables anyone?



Regards,



Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave
> Stubbs
> Sent: 24 April 2008 10:37
> To: Andy Robinson (blackadder)
> Cc: Jeffrey Martin; Peter Miller; talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops
> 
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jeffrey Martin wrote:
> >  >Sent: 24 April 2008 9:06 AM
> >
> > >To: Peter Miller
> >  >Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops
> >  >
> >
> > >Some people advocate nodes off to the side of the way
> >  >to represent the location of the pole or shelter in relation
> >  >to the road.
> >  >
> >  >Near where I live (Korea) there is often a shelter on
> >  >one side of the road for buses going both directions.
> >  >In that case I'm guessing I would put a shelter node
> >  >on one side of the road and a node that is not a shelter
> >  >on the other side.
> >  >
> >  >How do I relate these nodes to the way? I don't
> >  >like the idea of short segments perpendicular to
> >  >the way.
> >
> >  Because a bus stop is a highway feature it really in my view should be
> part
> >  of it. And because we map what we see on the ground then logically if
> there
> >  are two bus stops not quite opposite each other then I place two nodes,
> one
> >  for each and tag them appropriately. Placing short links from a bus
> stop
> >  node placed off the highway to the highway itself is I guess fine if
> those
> >  links are tagged as highway=footway, but personally I think that's a
> lot of
> >  unnecessary effort and complexity in the map.
> 
> Where as I think of bus stops as a pavement feature -- I really don't
> care which road it's on, that's the bus driver's problem ;-)
> I get the feeling we should be tagging both (if you can be bothered)
> and linking the two -- but I'd prefer this didn't happen with short
> footways... they come across to me as a bit fake. It's a virtual link,
> so just keep it virtual: bus_stops=here or something. Alternatively
> get out the relation box of tricks, but that might be unnecessarily
> complicated.
> It's certainly the better option than hacking someone's nice bus stops
> into your own preferred style, even if you aren't going to do it that
> way for new mapping.
> 
> >
> >  The remaining issue revolves around the direction of the bus at a
> particular
> >  node. I didn't have an answer to this until I looked at what the
> signage was
> >  on my local bust stops. Now I find it easy to tag because each one
> tells me
> >  in which direction the bus is travelling (eg "

Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops

[Peter Miller]

Comments in line

> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Laenen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 24 April 2008 12:30
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Cc: Andy Robinson (blackadder); 'Jeffrey Martin'; 'Peter Miller'
> Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-talk] Bus Stops
> 
> On Thursday 24 April 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder) wrote:
> > Because a bus stop is a highway feature it really in my view should
> > be part of it. And because we map what we see on the ground then
> > logically if there are two bus stops not quite opposite each other
> > then I place two nodes, one for each and tag them appropriately.
> > Placing short links from a bus stop node placed off the highway to
> > the highway itself is I guess fine if those links are tagged as
> > highway=footway, but personally I think that's a lot of unnecessary
> > effort and complexity in the map.
> 
> I'd like to compare tagging bus stops with tram stops here. While I
> think it's common (at least from what I've seen) to use nodes on the
> ways representing the tram lines, -- like we do for train stations --
> for some reason it isn't for bus stops. Even though tram stops have the
> exact same issue: it's not always a stop in both direction
> 

The EU standards make a distinction between a station, and a Stop.
Technically there should often be two Stop Points (or platforms) for the
tram, or either side of the track and a 'station' for the group. In some
cases there may indeed be one platform in the middle of the tram service
with tracks on either side in which case only one stop point would be
defined. Similarly an metro station may have one 'station' but multiple
platforms.

It would make sense to rationalise bus stops, tram stops, metro platforms,
ferry quays into the same structures as the standards do.


> 
> > The remaining issue revolves around the direction of the bus at a
> > particular node. I didn't have an answer to this until I looked at
> > what the signage was on my local bust stops. Now I find it easy to
> > tag because each one tells me in which direction the bus is
> > travelling (eg "towards Birmingham"). So I add a towards= tag and
> > jobs a good un. I'm not going to worry at the moment about how I
> > might use this tag to make bus route information, the important
> > aspect is that the data that's needed to work that out later is in
> > the database.
> 
> That can be done for bus stops with only one line, but not when there
> are ten bus lines stopping which go to ten different destinations.
>

Agreed, I think we should avoid overloading bus stops with service
information, although ;'towards Birmingham' might be an appropriate way of
indicating the direction that all buses much take from that spot, as opposed
to ';way from Birmingham' on the other side of the road. But that is to do
with the road system not today's bus service patterns.
 
> In a beautiful world we could just add the bus stops to the bus route
> relations, but we'd need to define good roles to make it obvious what
> direction a bus goes to there. But if that is worked out, there'll be
> no ambiguity left to put bus stop nodes on the highways anymore.
> 

We could talk about modelling bus services, but lets not for now. Lets sort
out fixed infrastructure and then revisit timetable.

Peter

> Greetings
> Ben


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Sorting out rivers and islands

[Peter Miller]

I have real problems with rivers and islands. I have been giving Washington
DC a bit of a spring clean over the weekend but I can't get parts of the
river to work properly. There is a large island that hasn't rendered, and a
part of the river north of the George Washington Memorial Parkway is not
right. I am sure it is something simple, but I can't see it. I am using
riverbank, because that is what was being used before, however I see it is a
proposed feature and that Mapnik doesn't seem to render it correctly. Could
someone sort it and tell me what was wrong?

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.90382

&lon=-77.08439&zoom=15&layers=0BFT

 

I also added an island in Portland, Oregon which failed to appear.

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.5739

&lon=-122.4038&zoom=14&layers=0BFT

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] spur railways?

[Peter Miller]

I notice that 'railway=spur' is used a lot in the tiger data. Here is an
example (where the railway continues north out of Davis as a 'spur').

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.57568
<http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.57568&lon=-121.74505&zoom=16>
&lon=-121.74505&zoom=16

 

 

However it doesn't render in Mapnik or Osmarender and is only a proposed
tag. Voting is open at it was approved by a number of people in Feb 08 (with
a few criticisms as well):
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Service)

 

 

Can we get this agreed and into the rendering soon.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Potlatch update and tiger cleanup tools

[Peter Miller]

It is great to see Potlatch continuing to develop more and more useful
functionality (see. http://potlatchosm.wordpress.com/ for details).  Undo is
of course very handy and also the way to see the background through the
ways. I am now using Potlatch so much that I am forgetting how to use JOSM
and only use JOSM for a smaller number of jobs that I can't yet do in
Potlatch.

 

The new feature in 0.9 that I don't think is quite right is the ability to
easily drag a way. In my experience it will be done in error 99 times out of
100. If that mistake is done by someone who doesn't notice or who don't know
about undo then the data is damaged. Last night I moved the section of the
UK coastline instead of adjusting a single node. Can this function be made
harder to access by mistake please?

 

For tiger cleanup (the motivation for dragging ways) I have a few other
requests:

 

When one deletes a selected node on a way can Potlatch then select the next
point on the same way, so one can hit delete again to delete a sequence of
nodes in order (currently it selects the way itself).

 

When a node on a way is selected then can the up and down arrow keys be used
to move along the nodes on the way. Can the left and right keys be used to
move to different ways connected to the same node. The combination of the
above three requests will allow one to navigate around the model in a
topological way rather than a Cartesian way that should be very handy.

 

A way of bulk-deleting unnecessary 'in-between' nodes on the ways in the
view where the node is associated with a single way, has no other attributes
and where the direction of the way hardly changes at the node or where the
nodes are very close together)? This would make a huge difference to the
efficiency of editing some parts of the USA which have bonkers numbers of
nodes on curves (Washington DC is very bad in this respect), and also where
spurious nodes are added to completely straight ways between junctions
(again Washington DC is bad here). This sort of batch-cleanup before
starting to edit manually would be very helpful. Possibly it should first
show visually what it intends to remove and then do it when one selects
'ok'.

 

The ability to drag a junction (where ways meet) to its correct position and
then have all the other in-between nodes scale to fit that new junction
position. This would be very handy for wiggly roads where the scale and
positions are both off, which happens quite a lot. I understand that
TeleAtlas used this approach when then imported Tiger.

 

A xxx_link tidyup function. Many areas have links of the wrong type. Once
one has got the main road network sorted one would ask Potlatch to set the
road classes of links correctly, so a motorway_link that connects a primary
road to a secondary road would be changed to 'primary_link'. Again this
would save a lot of tedious manual work with a simple algorithm. 

 

Finally in regard to Tiger cleanup Alan Miller as an 'unbraiding' script.
Could this be included in Potlatch?

 

Regarding the release process, could Potlatch in future go though a 'beta'
release process where it is available initially from a different URL so
people can try any changes out and sort out wrinkles before it goes on the
main site?

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Picher and Senica

[Peter Miller]

I have given Picher, Oklahoma and Senica a minor cleanup following their
hitting the headlines.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7394402.stm

 

I have sorted some of the geometry, updated some highway tags and corrected
some obvious errors in the rail network. I have also converted railway=spur
to railway=rail so that the lines as least render and meet current tagging
rules. Should the country road grid in an area like this be tertiary or
secondary I wonder (I haven't touched it so far)?

 

I have requested a re-render by Osmarender of both areas.  If anyone wants
to find it Picher is 'village 13km north east of Miami'

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.987

&lon=-94.8308&zoom=13&layers=B0FT

 

Should we patrol the news and make sure that places that hit the news are up
to a good standard?

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Partners sought for cycle routing project

[Peter Miller]

The UK is also setting out on creating data for a cycle journey planner
using a mixture of professionally and community collected data.

A number of people with OSM experience were involved in setting the data
standard and some good ideas from OSM have got into it and it will be
reasonably straightforward to convert between the UK standard and the OSM
model.

Here are the standards docns if anyone is interested...
http://kizoom.com/standards/cyclenet/schema/schemas.htm


The way these things go is that within 12-24 months a CEN working party will
be established to harmonise all the work being done locally across the EU
with representation from a bunch of countries.

Anyway I am interested in cycle routing and my company may be interested
in participating.

I also think the Department for Transport in the UK may also be interested
in what is being proposed. Can I suggest you let your local people see the
UK standards documents.




Regards,



Peter



> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 14:32:39 +0100
> From: Tom Chance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Partners sought for cycle routing project
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Cc: Tom Chance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Hi Frederik,
> 
> Just quickly, I am interested and my employer - www.bioregional.com -
> could be
> a partner on the bid. We're using OSM as part of a municipality
> sustainability project so this would be right up our street. I will talk
> to
> the council about getting them on board too.
> 
> I've copied my work address in - on holiday today - so please reply to
> that
> address to take it further.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Tom
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday 11 May 2008 11:06:37 Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >I have been approached by the city of Munich, who want to apply for
> > an EU grant to set up and operate a good cycle routing platform based
> > on OSM data.
> >
> > What they currently have is a platform that uses only their own data
> > which they spent (and spend) a lot of time to create and maintain.
> > They have basic road data and have manually added information about
> > the safety, suitability, and "green-ness" of routes so that you can
> > get a routing that matches your requirements.
> >
> > What they now intend to do is expand this to encompass the rural areas
> > around Munich as well, while at the same time delegating the data
> > maintenance to the community. Of course the whole thing will be
> > developed in a way that can easily be used for any other place (a
> > major selling point for an EU project). They also intend to create
> > incentives and processes for citizens improve the data.
> >
> > This will probably start with finding out (from their previous
> > experience) what data you need to do proper bike routing, and then
> > analyzing in how far this is already present in OSM, and where not,
> > create/improve tools for people to see where the data is missing and
> > fix it. Then there'll be the development of the routing platform,
> > perhaps based on pgrouting, and then they'll want to set up processes
> > for people to work with the data, e.g. also have a feedback loop into
> > the planning offices so that they know where bottlenecks are and so
> > on.
> >
> > It is not yet exactly clear what the plan is, but they are really keen
> > on not only taking OSM data but also working with the OSM community
> > and feeding everything back to OSM. Munich has recently been in the
> > press for ditching Windows and switching all of the administration IT
> > over to Linux, so they're probably the largest public entity in
> > Germany to have "seen the light" of free software (and free data now
> > as well).
> >
> > They're looking at a project duration of up to three years, and want
> > to request appropriate funding from the EU under the IEE programme
> > which, among others, has funds available for increasing the use of
> > cycling.
> >
> > The project application has all the right keywords to go down well
> > with the EU (application deadline is 20th June, but the decision will
> > only be made in late 2008), but there's one catch: Any successful EU
> > project needs to have a number of partners in different EU countries,
> > and that's why I am writing this post: Munich doesn't yet have enough
> > partners to get this through.
> >
> > Possible partners include city or regional administrations, cycle
> > associations, even commercial entities like publishers who have an
> > interest. Munich would be the "project lead", doing the deals with the
> > EU, but since the project isn't that specific yet, partners will
> > certainly have a say and their wishes be accommodated. Partners will
> > get their share of the money if the project is accepted, and will be
> > expected to co-operate in finalizing the proposal.
> >
> > As an example, a good partner would be a city administration that
> > wants to roll out cycle routing locally, o

Re: [OSM-talk] Partners sought for cycle routing project

[Peter Miller]

As you quite rightly point out the UK initiative has crown (c) all over it,
and the core data will be commercial and the core data standards are based
on OS standards etc etc, and that it is only the subjective data will be
community collected.

A number of us pushed for something more open and we thought we were getting
somewhere but then the doors started closing. I think the DfT is currently
spending £250K collecting data for a few places to enhance the base OS model
which is all a bit alloying, but I thought the data standard and attributes
were worth circulating to the list.

OSM data is not mentioned in the standard explicitly, but the mapping
between OSM and their standard is ok. The UK one is much more complex than
the OSM one because the roads layer and the footpaths layer and the cycling
layer are all distinct in the UK model.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes until an authority launches
an official cycle journey planner based on OSM data.




Regards,



Peter



> -Original Message-
> From: Shaun McDonald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 14 May 2008 13:15
> To: Frederik Ramm
> Cc: Peter Miller; talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Partners sought for cycle routing project
> 
> 
> On 14 May 2008, at 12:53, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> >> The UK is also setting out on creating data for a cycle journey
> >> planner
> >> using a mixture of professionally and community collected data.
> >
> > So this is a government-funded project?
> 
> Looks like it is the department for Transport who are setting it up.
> Look at the bottom of the pages and you see "Crown Copyright", which
> basically means that it is the UK Government or one of their agencies.
> 
> >
> >
> >> A number of people with OSM experience were involved in setting the
> >> data
> >> standard and some good ideas from OSM have got into it and it will be
> >> reasonably straightforward to convert between the UK standard and
> >> the OSM
> >> model.
> >
> > This is interesting but I thought it very impressive of the Munich
> > guys to actually embrace the OSM model and commit themselves to
> > working with that, instead of creating *another* data model. I'd
> > rather encourage them to go the OSM way than to do something else.
> >
> 
> These proposals seems to be a way to represent a route from a to b.
> They already have "defacto standards" for defining a route on public
> transport, which is used by the UK journey planners. This basically
> extends it to cycling.
> 
> > Unfortunately they have just called me and said they won't make this
> > year's deadline, so any results are even farther away than originally
> > thought.
> >
> > Still, my inquiry has resulted in some very interesting feedback
> > (including your message) and since this information wasn't available
> > on the existing OSM lists before this leads me to think we might have
> > use for an extra cycle-related mailing list? Unless there's a non-OSM
> > list already that can be used?
> >
> >> I also think the Department for Transport in the UK may also be
> >> interested
> >> in what is being proposed. Can I suggest you let your local people
> >> see the
> >> UK standards documents.
> >
> > I'll do that definitely. But what exactly is the plan with the UK
> > standard in relation to OSM data? Is the idea to create a complex
> > model that uses different data sources without creating a "derived
> > database"?
> 
>  From the site there is nothing that mentions osm.
> 
> Shaun


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Help to sort out rivers, islands and coast in Washnigton DC please

[Peter Miller]

 

I have clearly not got the hang of rivers and coastlines yet...

 

There is a missing island just north of the I66 on this view and also the
river bank is wrong further north by Canal Rd NW

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.8995

&lon=-77.0711&zoom=14&layers=0BFT

 

Further south the sea stops as rendered with osmarender

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.8094

&lon=-77.0362&zoom=14&layers=0BFT

 

However using mapnik there are different problems in this case the river
through the middle of Washington is missing.

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.8925

&lon=-77.0699&zoom=13&layers=B0FT

 

 

If someone is kind enough to sort this then can I suggest they say they are
going to do it on this list to avoid two people working on the same problem
at the same time.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OpenPlantMap

[Peter Miller]

 
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 10:22:40 +0100
> From: Shaun McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenPlantMap
> To: elvin ibbotson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> This data is a little bit on the specialised side for osm.
> 

I agree. I think we need to adopt a Wikipedia concept of 'notability'. For
example... A wood is notable, a large established solitary tree in a park
might be notable, but a nettle is not. Is a rare plant notable? I would
suggest it is not notable in OSM itself.

Possibly we will end up with specialist versions of OSM for different
purposes, for example for OpenPlantMap to accommodate details of plants.
Wikipedia set up Wikia.com to hold these other datasets.

These other DBs should possibly share a base layer of OSM data (roads,
buildings etc) so they can build specialist stuff on top of that and not
folk the core data. People would then be able to dip into OSM for core data
and supplement it with data from other projects.


Peter


> I would say that it would be better to setup a separate database and
> site specifically for this purpose based on the current osm software
> and tools.
> 
> Then if they want to map roads they deal with that from the osm data
> side. When it comes to map renders they merge the rendered maps with
> the help of transparency or icons/data on rendering.
> 
> Shaun
> 
> On 16 May 2008, at 10:04, elvin ibbotson wrote:
> 
> > Anyone involved with the National Trust? Apparently they are mapping
> > every plant in their gardens all over Britain. Do they know they
> > just need OSM and a few new tags (plant=nettle for example).
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7395915.stm
> >
> > elvin ibbotson
> >



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Notability (was OpenPlantMap)

[Peter Miller]

> Peter Miller wrote:
> 
> > I agree. I think we need to adopt a Wikipedia concept of 'notability'.
> For
> > example... A wood is notable, a large established solitary tree in a
> park
> > might be notable, but a nettle is not. Is a rare plant notable? I would
> > suggest it is not notable in OSM itself.
> 
> I'm afraid I see the notability criteria as one of Wikipedia's biggest
> problems so I would hate to see OSM go the same way.  I've seen too many
> genuinely useful articles get blown away because someone decided they
> covered non-notable subjects, to the point that I gave up editing
> Wikipedia.
> 
> The point is: why should anyone care about notability so long as the
> data is useful, accurate and maintained?
> 
> Wikipedia's deletion policies are deeply flawed: There are a group of
> users who make it their mission to delete articles.  When they nominate
> an article for deletion, most of the people who vote either wrote the
> article, or one of the group who's sole mission is to delete stuff - no
> one else cares enough about the deletion procedure to take part.  So the
> majority of the time, well written articles get deleted purely because
> of the massive bias in the quorum who vote on deletions.  I sincerely
> hope OSM doesn't decide to go down a similar route.
>

I have also fallen foul of the deletion police at Wikipedia who seem to
particularly focus on new articles and the process means the original author
often knows nothing about it until the article has gone and then it is hard
to work out where it went and why. I have had tedious battles with Wikipedia
police and know that others have given up over it. However, imho Wikipedia
does need a notability policy given its tendency to turn up on the first
page of google and ability to generate 'google juice' for referenced web
pages giving people a huge incentive to add information about minor people,
projects and events that they support.

Let's explore the relevance of notability to OSM. I have bumped into
notability arguments twice with OSM, once when I asked about flight paths
and was told they didn't belong in OSM because they would be confusing and
belonged somewhere else, and again regarding a proposed road for which I
entered the route (a trunk road in the middle of a very expensive
controversial public enquiry that the government is determined to build but
which might not get built).

Let's try some particular cases and see if they should be in or out.

Flight paths


Regarding plants and notability..

- Heritage trees (ones with preservation orders in the UK)
- Any plants/trees in public places including annuals
- Plants/trees in private gardens that are accessible to the public
- Plants/trees in private gardens that are not accessible to the public


And then with regard to things that might exist in the future but don't at
present..

- A road scheme 'under construction'
- A major road scheme being promoted by the authorities 
- A road scheme that was a priority of the authorities but now isn't
- A road scheme that is being promoted by a minority group.


Things that only sometimes exist..

The layout of tracks and stages for a festival that happens once a year
(Glastonbury, Burning Man etc)

Personally I support a 'layering' approach where minor interest information
is available in the DB but not part of the main roads planet file, but is
accessible as a special interest file. Possibly people will start creating
cuts of the data to suit different users. Possibly the tools will need to be
able to filter out certain features that are not relevant to their focus (ie
flight paths if mapping a town, or plants if mapping flight paths).

Over time I suspect that people will create versions of OSM for special
interests such as historical views of places, possible futures for places
and information of interest to only a small group


Peter 

 
> --
> 
>   - Steve
> xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.nexusuk.org/
> 
>   Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] New: 'OSM Mapper' for OpenStreetMap Contributors, by Ito World

[Peter Miller]

Ito World Ltd is pleased to offer its new product 'OSM Mapper' to the OSM
community. We demonstrated this product at 'State of the Map' and a number
of OSM contributors have been trying it out since then. We are now ready to
release it more widely.

 


OSM Mapper is a free product that allows OpenStreetMap contributors to
analyse the data for selected areas in lots of different ways to identify
and correct faults. It also allows users to set up RSS feeds to monitor
changes to the data in these selected areas. Read more on our blog:

http://itoworld.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-osm-mapper-for-openstreetmap.html

 

We like making interesting pictures from data. Here are a set of images
created using OSM Mapper and some of our other products:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/itomedia/pool/

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter Miller

Ito World Ltd

 <http://www.itoworld.com> www.itoworld.com

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] New: 'OSM Mapper' for OpenStreetMap Contributors, by Ito World

[Peter Miller]

> -Original Message-
> From: Shaun McDonald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 19 July 2008 19:59
> To: Tim Waters (chippy)
> Cc: Peter Miller; talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] New: 'OSM Mapper' for OpenStreetMap Contributors,
> by Ito World
> 
> 
> On 19 Jul 2008, at 19:44, Tim Waters (chippy) wrote:
> 
> > It is a very good tool! many many thanks! It's making me want to map
> > more, to climb higher up the charts, heh.
> >
> > Also, I note, that for my area, over half the contributors add just
> > one or two features, a pub here, a road there. This is really
> > encouraging for the project, in my opinion, it shows people just
> > adding their little bit - something that in the future, I think we
> > will see much more of (possibly even negating the need for a login for
> > just a casual edit).
> 
> Could it be that it is a mapper who is just passing through the area
> that you are looking at?
> 
> It's not the first time I've done a long cycle and edited the odd
> thing here and there on the way. It might be a hard core mapper who is
> just touching a corner of the bounding box that you are looking at.
> 
> Shaun

If I could give a general response to the comments today...

Firstly, we are very pleased to hear that people are enjoying our new
product. The humming and gently vibrating servers confirm that a healthy
number of people are having a nose around. Thanks for the feedback and ideas
for future enhancements.

We have made a number of tweeks to the product today in response to
experience. The main one has been to adjust the RSS format to make it work
better with more readers and to include an RSS symbol in the URL bar which
defaults to 'all sessions' unless any filters are applied. We need to do
more work on RSS over the next couple of days. We have moved the 'export
image' to make it more prominent. If you want an image then do use this link
to create an image of the size and format you prefer with a tile, subtitle,
key and date burned into the body of the image.

Re Shaun's comment about knowing more about other mappers... I think it
would be good to be able to provide more information about people's mapping
patterns; to indicate how long they have been mapping, how many changes they
have been made and details of their recent sessions. Let's not expose
people's mapping patterns unnecessarily but I think it is relevant to know
if a mapper is new, or is a national railway expert, a proof-reader or
indeed someone that other mappers have had problems with. Ideally this would
fit into the proposed 'roll-back' functionality.

Regarding Chippy's comment about getting to the top of list... I do hope we
are not increasing the intensity or people's 'compulsive mapping disorder'!
I know the seriousness of the condition and hope that the league table
doesn't lead to people leaving home for months on end to get to the top
spot, and thereby precipitate others to do the same! As we close in on
completion will we find a whole gaggle of thin and wretched mappers, all
wearing tatty orange OSM jackets, racing towards the one remaining unmapped
village to get to the top of the list!


Regards,



Peter


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] New: 'OSM Mapper' for OpenStreetMap Contributors, by Ito World

[Peter Miller]

Thanks for all your comments and encouragement.

I have just added a page to the wiki for 'OSM Mapper' and ask people to add
suggestions for improvement and other comments to that page.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_Mapper


I have also made a note of you suggestion on the page. Feel free to sign it
if you prefer.




Regards,


Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Waters (chippy) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 19 July 2008 19:44
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] New: 'OSM Mapper' for OpenStreetMap Contributors,
> by Ito World
> 
> It is a very good tool! many many thanks! It's making me want to map
> more, to climb higher up the charts, heh.
> 
> Also, I note, that for my area, over half the contributors add just
> one or two features, a pub here, a road there. This is really
> encouraging for the project, in my opinion, it shows people just
> adding their little bit - something that in the future, I think we
> will see much more of (possibly even negating the need for a login for
> just a casual edit).
> 
> The only little gripe I have is viewing it on my screen - it's
> limited to 1024 wide  so I cannot see both the maps and the right hand
> side columns at the same time. Perhaps a setting / preference could be
> set to allow me to have a smaller map?
> 
> cheers,
> 
> chip
> 
> On 7/18/08, Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ito World Ltd is pleased to offer its new product 'OSM Mapper' to the
> OSM
> > community. We demonstrated this product at 'State of the Map' and a
> number
> > of OSM contributors have been trying it out since then. We are now ready
> to
> > release it more widely.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > OSM Mapper is a free product that allows OpenStreetMap contributors to
> > analyse the data for selected areas in lots of different ways to
> identify
> > and correct faults. It also allows users to set up RSS feeds to monitor
> > changes to the data in these selected areas. Read more on our blog:
> >
> > http://itoworld.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-osm-mapper-for-
> openstreetmap.html
> >
> >
> >
> > We like making interesting pictures from data. Here are a set of images
> > created using OSM Mapper and some of our other products:
> >
> > http://www.flickr.com/groups/itomedia/pool/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Peter Miller
> >
> > Ito World Ltd
> >
> > www.itoworld.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> >  talk mailing list
> >  talk@openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> >
> >


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Wikipedia article tidy-up

[Peter Miller]

 

I have given the Wikipedia article on OpenStreetMap a tidy up. Please feed
free to make further changes as there is more that could be done, including
added references. I hope that I have made is read better for someone who
comes across the project for the first time. I have demoted (but not
removed) the technical details.

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

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] superways as relations ?

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:16:47 -0700
> From: "Karl Newman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] superways as relations ?
> To: "Robert (Jamie) Munro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Robert (Jamie) Munro
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> 
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > David Earl wrote:
> > > On 04/08/2008 11:14, vegard wrote:
> > >> For naming of streets in cities, where properties change very often
> and
> > >> you have to make many small ways, it sometimes gets annoying that the
> > >> name is duplicated.
> > >>
> > >> I was wondering: How good/easy would it be to make a superway-
> relation
> > >> to fix that? I.e. group several ways for labeling-intentions?
> > >>
> > >> I'm no expert on the inner workings in either of the renderers, but
> to
> > >> me it sounds like a quick fix to a small annoyance. If someone that
> > >> knows the renderers could either agree or disagree, I'd be happy
> anyways
> > >> (well, obviously happier if they agree :)
> > >
> > > See
> > >
> >
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Collected_Ways
> > >
> > > AFAIK this isn't rendered at present, so for the time being the names
> > > would have to appear on the ways themselves as well if you want to see
> > > them, but in principle, a renderer could take note of this, and if it
> > > becomes a widespread idiom, no doubt they will.
> >
> > I think that is a chicken and egg scenario. I think the renderers (and
> > namefinder) need to support it before people will start using it. Then
> > very quickly we could move all names (and refs and highway types...) to
> > relationships, and we would have a much cleaner data structure.
> >
> > Lots of wierd cases where part of a road has more than one ref, more
> > than one name, or more than one of any other property go away - the
> > relevant ways just become a member of more than one relationship.
> >
> > Personally, I believe that most tagging should be on relationships not
> > ways. Only small physical things like layer, bridge and tunnel should be
> > specified at a way level.
> >
> > Robert (Jamie) Munro
> >
> 
> I think this is one point where the different data clients or consumers
> have
> different preferences. To my mind, you've got it backward. The "small
> physical things" like bridges and tunnels are the parts that should go
> into
> relations, because they have nothing to do with the physical continuity of
> the way. A routing app does not care about bridges and tunnels. However,
> your perspective is probably one of rendering, which would prefer to see
> the
> ways chopped up at bridges and tunnels.
>

I agree we should not be chopping ways for bridges etc, or indeed for speed
limit changes etc.

Will we not in the end be using a combination of 'Collected Ways' (for big
things) and 'Segmented Ways' (for smaller things)?

I suggest that we will settle on a balance between tagging the actual ways
and the relations by experimentation.

I can image using creating a way for a section of road with a particular
name. I might then make it part of a Collected Way to add a 'ref' to it. I
might then use a Segmented Way to assign lower speed limits to certain
sections and a bridge relation to say that it goes over another road.

Time will tell but we are now at that awkward stage where we need both data
and tools that use the data and allow it to be edited elegantly. Possibly
this is exactly the time to thrash out the tagging protocols and to then
encourage implementation.

An important aspect will be to get the renderers etc to handle inheritance
of tags from relationships. I suggest that the precedence is as follows:

A tag on a 'segmented way' has highest priority
A tag on the way itself is next
A tag on a collected way is used where it is not overridden by a tag of the
same name on the way itself or on a 'segmented way'.

One would then be able to assign a 40mph speed to the road as a whole and
then add lower speed limits where it went through each village.

Can I suggest various people commit to develop different areas of data to
support the emerging standards to allow tool-makers to develop and check
their tools out?



Regards,


PeterIto



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

[OSM-talk] Listing all contributors to an area

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:11:56 +0200
> From: "Erik Johansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Listing all contributors to an area
> To: "Talk Openstreetmap" 
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> > If you're looking for a list of contributors in a certain area, the
> > OSM Mapper[1] tool may help you out.
> >
> > [1] http://www.itoworld.com/static/osmmapper
> >
> 
> Thanks! That tool is very useful even beyond my purposes, very nice
> way to view the "recent changes"  as on Wikipedia.
> 

I am glad you like it (we wrote it); however do note that it only details
the last person to touch each way, not all the historical editors who may
have contributed to the current map. For the purpose of attribution I
suggest people stick with the conventional general attribution to
'openstreetmap and contributors'. It is however very useful to see who is
active in an area and where they are working and when.

Btw, we have had a problem downstream with the data feed to our service last
night and as a result we have been running with data 24 hours out-of-date
today. We are assured that this problem was temporary and that a normal
service will be available from tomorrow am.



Regards,


Peter Miller
Ito World Ltd


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

[OSM-talk] OSM Mapper - status update

[Peter Miller]

Just a quick note to say that we have been experiencing some issues with the
data feed to our 'OSM Mapper' service
(http://www.itoworld.com/static/osmmapper

) over the past few days.

 

On Tuesday we ran with the previous days data. Yesterday (Wednesday) and so
far today (Thursday) we are running with Tuesday night's data but due to a
problem with the upstream data feed we appear to be missing all edits made
between Wednesday 13th and Sunday 17th August.

 

We would like to assure you that we are working on a resolution to this
issue but and that in the mean time the service will remain available but
may not be telling the whole story.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

Peter Miller

Ito World Ltd

 <http://www.itoworld.com> www.itoworld.com

 

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

[OSM-talk] SOTM relations workshop: results

[Peter Miller]

> 
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:11:34 +0100
> From: "Andy Allan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM relations workshop: results
> To: "Ben Laenen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > If the route goes both ways between A and D, the ways have no roles.
> >
> > A > B < C -> D
> >|   |
> >v   v
> >E > F
> >
> > If in this example the route goes from A to D via ABEFCD and the route
> > goes from D to A via DCBA, the roles are as follows:
> > AB, CD: no role
> > BC, BE, EF: forward
> > CF: backward
> 
> Spot on. Given that I know you're both agreeing with one another, and
> it's still confusing, just imagine how hard it's going to be to
> explain it to the other 60,000 OSMers :-)
> 
> I'm hoping that having rendered examples, like
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/gravitystorm/2771299743/ should at least
> keep people on the right track.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andy

I have just seen the conversation about large forests etc and it is
something I have been thinking about.

I have just being using a relationship to do administrative boundary for
Suffolk which was very simple and it led me to think if we should be using
relationships for other boundaries.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Boundaries

Why not use the boundary relation concept to define the boundary for a
school, a park, a forest or a lake? If one does large areas like that then
the ways that make up the boundary can be sensible lengths, can be split up
as needed for other tagging purposes and one does not need to ever overload
multiple ways onto the same sequence of nodes. Here is the discussion about
boundaries.

To give a concrete example: We have a local park, part of which is bordered
by a road, path by a hedge and part by a fence. The borough boundary comes
along a section of the fence and along part of one of the roads. Currently I
create a way for the park that encompases the whole park. For the road
sections I create a way that shares nodes with the park as appropriate. When
I come to do the administrative boundary I find myself needing to create a
new way that goes down the side of the park along the fence. All this seems
very complicated and unnecessary.

How would it work using relationships? I would then just snip the roads at
the boundaries of the park. I would like to then create a section of way
tagged 'fence' for the non-road boundaries for the park. I would then create
a new relation called 'boundary=park' and associate this with the relevant
ways, and another called 'boundary=administrative' for the borough council
boundary.

I realise this is a little radical and could possibly result in the fudge
(as I have always seen it) of ways being used to represent areas being
deprecated.


Does this make any sense?


Regards,


Peter


 



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

[OSM-talk] OSM Mapper status -fully operational again

[Peter Miller]

Ok, we believe that OSM Mapper is now be back up and running again with a
complete current dataset. Thanks for a good team effort by ITO and by
Geofabrik to get it sorted quickly (Geofabrik provide some very useful daily
geographical cuts of OSM data that we use as our source material).

http://www.itoworld.com/static/osmmapper

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter

 

 

Peter Miller

Ito World Ltd

 

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Administrative boundaries (UK)

[Peter Miller]

> From: Shaun McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Administrative boundaries (UK)
> To: Bob Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Hi Bob,
> 
> Use the information on the ground. You will usually find signs welcoming
> you to the new area. It may be a few hundred metres either side, so look
> for the change in tar quality. You may also find that bin mapping is an
> option since the council often puts their name on the bins. (In Ireland
> you need to do bin mapping to get the names of the streets, rather than
> the boundaries).

Old (NPE) OS mapping is good. I was amazed to find how little of the county
boundary had changed in the past 50 years. I would use local knowledge and a
variety of current (possibly copyright) sources to see if the old OS maps
were still current and then digitise off the old maps. For my county the
majority of the boundary was along rivers anyway (which I also entered from
old OS (NPE) maps.

The borough boundary however defeated me; It has changed considerably and
for the majority doesn't follow any recognisable features on the ground so I
don't have any usable source for that at the moment and have left it alone.

It is possible that where it is not clear that it doesn't really matter much
anyway (certainly not 200 meters either way), and that where it is in urban
areas one should be able to get it on or between the appropriate roads. I
might return to the borough boundary some time and have another go. I might
ask a borough councillor to draw the boundary on my paper map and then
transcribe it.


Regards,



Peter

> 
> Shaun
> 
> Bob Hawkins wrote:
> > I wonder from where most people obtain their administrative boundaries
> > to digitise for OSM?  The most prevalent source is Ordnance Survey,
> > but that current data is copyrighted, of course.  I am particularly
> > interested in civil parish boundaries, then in local authority
> > boundaries to build up areas of interest and coverage.  Can anyone help?
> >
> > With regards,
> >
> > Bob Hawkins
> > 



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Left and Right?

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:41:03 +0100
> From: "Dave Stubbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Left and Right?
> To: "Robin Paulson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: OSM Talk 
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Robin Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > 2008/8/26 Mark Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Is 'mapping for renderers' any worse than 'mapping for routers'?
> >
> > both are bad i think
> >
> >> Step back from the "we're going to use it for routing busses" approach
> a
> >>  moment; a fair few users may wish to print a map, so the renderers
> need
> >> to do this right. I will prefer to see the bus-stops pass on the sat-
> nav
> >> map as reference as I drive by them. I might like warning of busses
> >> likelihood of stopping.
> >>
> >> My main driver on this is that they are roadside features, not highway
> >> features. As I said, like pubs, postoffices, etc. This is the real
> >> world, mapping what's on the ground, bus stops are not like
> >> mini-roundabouts or traffic lights.
> >
> > well, it's a representation of the real world, and idealised, yet
> > imperfect one at that
> >
> > i'm not sure why they're roadside features, rather than highway
> > features. the bus stops *on* the highway (which includes the path, as
> > we discussed earlier). at no point does it leave the highway
> >
> > the *sign* is on the roadside. we're not mapping signs. maps and signs
> > do the same thing, but in different ways - they contain information
> > about a mapworthy feature, but each are not mapworthy themselves.
> > we're not mapping signs
> 
> 
> What it comes down to is this: a bus stop is not the same thing as
> where the bus stops. Although they're obviously related. We have half
> the people in this discussion trying to map the bus stop, and half of
> them trying to map where the bus stops, and half happy to do either
> really... so yes, it has a sign (and possibly a shelter), but it's not
> _just_ a sign: it's a destination in its own right and about the only
> sign I can think of right now that people queue up behind. It's also
> very important where it is, unlike most signs which are just telling
> you something about somewhere else.
> 
> Whether a "bus stop" is a feature of the road, or a feature of the
> pavement is entirely a matter of perspective...
> 
> If I happen to be standing at a bus stop I really don't care which
> road the bus will come down to pick me up: I'm at the bus stop so it
> should be fairly obvious. And the only important thing is how to get
> to the bus stop, because if I'm not in the right place the bus won't
> stop even if I wave at it frantically (OK, this bit varies from place
> to place... usually inversely proportional to the number of buses :-(
> )
> 
> On the other hand if I'm on the bus, then the exact position on the
> pavement of the bus stop where I get off isn't important. I just want
> to know when the bus has got to the right part of the route and I
> should hit the button to get off. The bus will stop in the right place
> on it's own (wow, magic).
> 
> Any arguments re the pavement being part of the road anyway are
> ultimately flawed... ie: post boxes phone boxes, cycle parking and
> even ATMs would be way nodes under this definition and whether or
> not they should be doesn't really matter, as I don't think anyone is
> adding them as such.
> 
> We can't represent both properties properly with a single node. In
> either case we lose something, or else make reconstructing it
> difficult. So I'd suggest this: map both, or whichever you happen to
> be interested in, and someone think up a way of binding them together
> nicely with a relation for the topologists.
> 
> Personally I just stick a node where the bus stop actually is. That's
> what is most useful for me at the present time.

With regard to the Dave's important distinction between the bus stop (where
passengers wait) and the actual position on the highway where the bus stops,
let's not forget trams and trains where in some cases there may be one
location where people wait which has tracks on both sides and vehicles stop
either side of the Stop Point. This begs the question about how we map
platforms and quays for trains/trams/metro and ferry which are actually
areas features beside one or more ways. Trains also can have sub-platforms
where there is platform 4 which for some services is split into 3A and 3B on
in the case of my local station into 3A, 3B and 3C.

My vote is to map where the fixed infrastructure is (the platform, pole,
shelter) as point or area feature in the correct physical location beside
the road but possibly software will need to deal with both models for the
time being. If the separate node approach is used then the assumption should
be that the software will associate it with the nearest Way at the nearest
point and that the way should not be more than X meters from an appropriate
wa

[OSM-talk] Potlatch & duplicated node

[Peter Miller]

> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:59:37 +0100
> From: "David Groom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [OSM-talk] Potlatch & duplicated node
> To: 
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>   reply-type=original
> 
> Whilst reviewing data I've noted recently a large number of duplicated
> nodes.  These occur where one way joins another.
> 
> I've managed to create a few myself, but have noted that many other users
> are doing the same.  In each instance the relevant ways have "created by
> Potlatch" as tags.
> 
> I presume that :
> 
> (1) Either there must be a bug in Potlatch
> (2) Its far too easy for a user to inadvertently create duplicated nodes.
> 
> Take for example the area
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html?mlat=13.166319744096374&mlon=-
> 61.239985647460315&zoom=12
> .  The validator in JOSM reports 176 duplicated nodes.
> 
> Same area  as shown on informationfreeway
> http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=13.153544792952308&lon=-
> 61.222993541715226&zoom=15&layers=T0B0F
> 
> I would stress I'm not blaming the users who created the data in that
> area.
> I count myself as a fairly experienced OSM mapper, and as I stated earlier
> I
> have been managing to create some duplicated nodes, and that's even after
> reading and re-reading the Potlatch editing FAQ.
> 
> If its not a bug in Potlatch, then could the program be changed so that it
> is much harder to duplicate nodes.
>
Also, when manipulating ways which are parts of relations it seems to be
possible to break the Potlatch/Server link and end up with duplicate ways. I
think the best way to do this is to split and join and delete ways which is
part of a relation. I haven't worked it through in detail to understand
exactly what is happening and give the repeatable formula but could do if
that was useful if others haven't already done this.

Sometimes I find I have a way which is part of a relationship which refuses
to die. If I remove all the nodes except for two, then remove the
relationship and all the tags then it I seem to be able to delete the last
two.

Finally, a question. If I have a pair of ways on top of each other (the edge
of a park and a road for example that share nodes; is there any way to
select the way I am actually interested in rather than just the one that is
'on top'?



Regards



PeterIto



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik handling of highways that are also landuse

[Peter Miller]

> -Original Message-
> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:59:12 +0100
> From: "Thomas Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik handling of highways that are also
>   landuse...
> To: "Dermot McNally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: osm 
> Message-ID:
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Dermot McNally <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Folks - with reference to this:
> >
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.72339&lon=-
> 6.34273&zoom=17&layers=B00FTF
> >
> > ...which is a section of the Mapnik render of the outcome of the very
> > successful Drogheda Mapping Party in Ireland. Towards the centre of
> > the map, you'll see what is represented as an oval area of residential
> > highway. I can almost see why, but it struck me that it represents
> > unwanted behaviour that could possibly be fixed.
> >
> > What we have here is a closed way of type highway=residential.
> > Importantly, it isn't tagged as an area. It _is_ tagged (the same way)
> > as landuse=grass. So without understanding the internals of Mapnik,
> > it's as though the landuse, which applies at area-level, infects the
> > highway tag and causes it to be considered as an area too.
> >
> Correct
> >
> > Clearly, I could simply draw a second way through the same nodes, and
> > there are plenty of heated discussions over which approach is the
> > saner. But it feels as though this tag combination ought to be able to
> > render correctly as is.
> 
> Mapnik still likes the one way per feature way of doing things, (as a
> matter of fact, so do I, seems more logical that the two can be
> separated if required later)
>

Personally I prefer to recommend that you definer the area of grass using a
separate way that uses the same nodes as the residential road, but which is
certainly a separate way from the road. You may prefer to define it as a
separate way using separate nodes as this can make editing easier in the
short term, however Richard explained yesterday on talk how to use '/' to
select from the different ways associated with the same node which I will
investigate. Using the approach you have tried is definitely to be
discouraged imho, and mixes up two different things into one way.

As a longer term discussion I am interested in morphing the 'multi-polygon'
relation into a 'polygon' relation so it can be used as an alternative ways
of defining areas. The relation would need to allow a number of linear
features to form the boundary of the area. The relation would then hold the
tags that are associated with the area (in this case 'landuse=grass'). The
relation could also be able to refer to zero or more 'inner' areas which can
be defined in a similar way to define 'holes' in polygons.

This approach allows a single 'edge' to be part of a number of areas (I gave
the example of the edge of a park also being the boundary for the borough in
a previous post). Currently the approach of using boundary:left=Ipswich for
part of the boundary is not compatible with have a single way defining the
area of the park. I am also advocating that we dump the current boundary
left: and right: tagging in favour of using the 'boundary' relation for
boundaries.

I might come up with a technical demonstrator for this in the near future so
explore how it might work in practice. There is more discussion on polygons
and relations here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:Relation:multipolygon

And the boundary relation here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Boundaries

If this approach was used we would be able to run with both coding systems
in the short term and possibly then deprecate ways being used for areas and
boundaries in the longer term.

Any other thoughts? Am I wasting my time on this idea, or do others see
value in it? Is so would it be useful to produce some trial rendering or
would someone like to make osmarender or Mapnik handle it?


Regards,



Peter(Ito)




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

[OSM-talk] How do you respond to talk posts so that that they fit correctly into the thread structure in talk archive?

[Peter Miller]

I have noticed for some time that my responses to threads of conversations
don't appear properly in the thread structure in the archive; mine always
seem to be treated as a new conversation. 

 

This is what I do.

 

I receive the 'digests' of recent conversations.

I notice a post that I want to respond to

I hit 'reply' (this keeps all the text and adds '>' to the start of each
line)

I cut out all the text I don't want

I add my new text

I replace the subject line 'digest blar blar blar' with the subject line cut
from the message I am responding to

I press send

 

 

So, what am I doing wrong?

 

 

 

 

Peter (Ito)

 

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Path rendering in the cycleway

[Peter Miller]

I think it is really confusing for tags to appear on the main list of
features (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Map_Features) which then
don't get implemented by core applications and I fear that we could end up
with a maze of different tags used by different applications which would be
really confusing for mappers and expecially newcomers?

A new person, reads up, does some cautious editing and them some features
don't appear on some applications they get told, well. if you want a
walking route to appear on mapnik you should tag it as , but if you want
it on osmarender remember that you mustn't use yyy however on the cycle
layer it is best to yyy except that free-map prefers zzz and if you want it
to route on openrouteservice you should etc etc.

I think there are two messages here, firstly we should be really careful
about voting for new features in the core tagging list unless they are
strictly necessary, and secondly when a tag does get added then we should
look for rapid adoption across the main applications.

So, I am not really commenting on the path tag as such (although I could
because I have used it and do want it to appear on the cycle layer), it is
more that I want to avoid different dialects of tagging being used to pander
to different applications. The rule 'render and they will come' will become
really divisive if different application demand different tagging for the
same features.


Regards,



Peter(Ito)


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christoph Eckert
> Sent: 30 August 2008 21:13
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-talk] Path rendering in the cycleway
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > highway=path has never been rendered on the cyclemap.
> >
> > highway=footway is currently rendered, so if you want it to appear,
> > then you'll need to use that tag.
> 
> was it possible to add highway=path?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> ce
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

[OSM-talk] list server web interface is down?

[Peter Miller]

 

I can't get to see the archive emails on these url:

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/newbies

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

 

'Platform status' says they should be working. Could someone take a look.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Peter(Ito)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Connecting ferry routes to roads?

[Peter Miller]

Good point. I have just connected the ferry route to the road network but I
think there should be a node with amenity=ferry_terminal at this point. This
is the point at which one would say the ferry called at within the
timetable. Incidently I have added one at a point where the ferry just runs
up onto the beach (ie there is no actual physical quay at all). I notice
that Potlatch doesn't prompt for amenity=ferry_terminal.

Btw, if one is talking about a larger ferry port, such as the Port of Dover
how should one code the individual quay and the actual port as a whole? Is
amenity=ferry_terminal the quay or the port itself and how should one encode
the other one? The definition we have on the wiki is "Ferry terminal/stop. A
place where people/cars/etc. can board and leave a ferry." Which to me is
the smaller of the two, ie the quay. The word 'Port' does not appear on the
wiki.

In general we seem to have scattered public transport access stuff all over
the namespace and some features are still missing. Here is a brief review of
what is there and what is missing

'Aerodrome' (airport) and 'Gate' are both within Aeroway (sounds sensible to
me).

'Railway Station' and 'Tram Stop' are within Railway. There is no platform
tag. We have a subway_entrance but not an 'Entrance' for a surface station
or for an airport or anything else at all in fact except a cave!

'Bus Stop' is part of 'highway' but the 'bus station' is an 'amenity'.

'Moorings' is within Waterway but 'ferry_terminal' is within amenity. Pier
is within man-made. We don't have a Port tag at all. Slip-way is within
Leisure.

A 'taxi bay' is within Amenity.

Risking being immediately shot down I am going to suggest that it might be
useful to consider rationalising some of this tagging to avoid a java-script
sort of mess that we have to then live with for ever? We could do an audit
of the current public transport tags (and possibly others) and in then move
a bunch of them to new more rational places and update the tools at the same
time. If we don't do this sort of thing soon I feel we will be stuck with it
for ever. Possibly we could dual tag for a while. We add the new tag and
deprecate the old one but ensure it remains available for a while.

In particular I suggest the following:

In relation to buses would it be more logical to move 'bus station' to
'highway'.

For ferries would it be more logical for ferry_terminal, Pier and Slipway to
all be within 'Waterway' features and to create a Port tag for the boundary
of large ports. Possibly natural=lake and landuse=reservoir and also belong
there.

For railways should be create a Platform tag. Turn subway_entrance into
entrance which can be used for all terminals (and also possibly other
buildings/establishments/landuse). Personally I think entrance is actually a
very general key for any node on a boundary and should not be a value for
another key if that makes sense.

Sorry for this long answer to a short question but it is something I have
been meaning to mention for some time. Any thoughts?



Peter


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Groom
> Sent: 01 September 2008 13:22
> To: osm
> Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-talk] Connecting ferry routes to roads?
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dan Karran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "osm" 
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2008 3:29 PM
> Subject: [OSM-talk] Connecting ferry routes to roads?
> 
> 
> >
> > I fixed up the Isle of Man Steam Packet ferry route so that it goes
> > all the way into Douglas harbour in the Isle of Man again. While I was
> > at it, I connected it up with the road network so that routing
> > programmes could route traffic through it as well. Is this common
> > practice, and is there a standard way of linking them in? I've just
> > linked the route to a service road which is connected to the rest of
> > the road network.
> 
> That seems to make sense and is how I have been mapping vehicle ferry
> routes.
> 
> However I'm not quite sure what to do with ferry routes which are for foot
> passengers and available for cyclists, but not for motorcars..
> Following the logic above I would  connect the ferry route to the nearest
> highway with a footway tag. Although this would allow routing for cyclists
> and pedestrians this seems "wrong" to me.
> 
> For instnace the high speed poassenger service from Southamption to East
> Cowes
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.89469&lon=-
> 1.40605&zoom=17&layers=B00FTF
> I have not conncted to the highway down the pier, as it would produce
> short
> stubs of footway rendered on the maps which really are just corridors
> through buildings, but this means at the moment the ferry route is
> unconnected to anything.
> 
> David
> 
> 
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Dan
> >
> > --
> > Dan Karran
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > www.dankarran.com
> >
> > ___
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.o

[OSM-talk] Ito World offers expanded Coverage for OSM Mapper to include Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Australasia, South America and Canada

[Peter Miller]

I am delighted to announce that we have now increased 'OSM Mapper' coverage
to include Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Australasia, South America and
Canada. More details available on our blog:

http://itoworld.blogspot.com/2008/08/expanded-coverage-for-osm-mapper.html

 

If you don't know what 'OSM Mapper' is then a good place to start is to
check out our original announcement:

http://itoworld.blogspot.com/2008/07/new-osm-mapper-for-openstreetmap.html

 

Btw, we are only leaving the USA out for now because it is a very large
dataset and we need a bit of time to allow this new expanded area to settle
down and then the USA is next on our list. Do subscribe to our blog to learn
about future enhancements to the product and coverage.

 

For those of you who noticed the problem with our daily update for a few
days last week, you might be interested to know that this was caused by a
big increase in the size of the European dataset when a new large bulk
import arrived which exploded our import process and prompted us to do this
work a little earlier than we intended! We should now be back with regular
daily updates and sorry about the inconvenience in the mean time.

 

We have also made some minor improvement to the product's functionality: we
added a link to the OSM feature browser so you can see more details about a
feature and its history, we have fixed some problems with accessing pages
without first having signed in our site which caused problems for RSS users
in particular, we have improved the map quality by drawing selected features
on top and we have improved our bounding box algorithm to stop large
features such as long ferry routes from appearing incorrectly in area
reports. More details on our blog soon.

 

If you have any suggestions for the product then do please add them on the
OSM wiki here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_Mapper

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Peter Miller

Ito World Ltd

www.itoworld.com

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