Re: [OSM-talk] Missing Background Layers
Silly question, why would you trace from Mapnik, since it's OSM anyway? On 8 January 2016 at 23:13, Steve Doerr wrote: > When editing in Potlatch 2, the list of background layers seems rather > short. In particular, Mapnik (the default style) is not on the list. > > Bug? Or change of policy? > > -- > Steve > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Why newbies' comment/message response rate is so low?
From experience, I know that such responses are intimidating and put people off mapping. My girlfriend started mapping some areas when I showed her how to do it and immediately somebody sent her an email saying how she should be doing things because he doesn't map it that way (Neither way was official or written down anyway), and in the end she said she didn't like it and felt intimidated and decided not to carry on. I think people need a playpen where they can try out ideas and map before contributing to the main map (Maybe there already is, I don't know). I think it should also be a requirement that people add a comment upon every commit to avoid such arguments. I'm getting a little tired of seeing constant updates in my area from people who don't add comments on why or what they've changed. Tony On 14 November 2015 at 18:04, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Gerd Petermann > wrote: >> I think that's quite okay presuming that many users don't speak english > I forgot to mention. My operations with respect to newcomers are > almost solely in Poland. So I write in Polish. > >> and another group simply doesn't like to be watched / corrected > I thought this is what community is about? Reviewing others' work? ;-) > The things I write about are rather obvious mistakes, like: no main > POI tag (amenity, shop, ...), free text in opening_hours, geometry > errors and so on. > > Recently I found out that simple "please fix" or "please respond" (if > edits need clarification) boosts chances for a reply or fixing by the > user. How about we make some tips/guidelines for communications with > newcomers on the Wiki? People could share practices they find most > effective. > > Michał > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Carto v2.33.0 release
The woodland change looks much better, but would it not be possible to render broadleaved, needleleaved and mixed using different tree images, as seen on other maps? This would, I think, give people more incentive to add this information when mapping woodland. Regards Tony On 15 August 2015 at 04:27, Paul Norman wrote: > This email is also in user diary form at osm.org/user/pnorman/diary/35589 > where issue numbers are linked. > > OpenStreetMap Carto 2.33.0 has been released. This release focuses on > cartographic style improvements, but the release notes also include 2.32.0. > > The biggest changes are > > - A randomized symbology for forests for natural=wood and landuse=forest > #1728 #1242 > > A long time in the works, this improvement has finally landed. The two > tags were merged - they are indistinguishable to the data consumer.[1] > A randomized symbology was first suggested by SK53[2] at SOTM-EU 2014, > and this feature would not have happened without his extensive research, > or imagico's tools for creating an irregular but uniformly distributed > and periodic dot pattern[3] > > - Rendering minor roads and service rail later for mid-zoom clarity > #1682 #1692 #1676 #1647 > > As all residential, unclassified, and service roads in a city became > mapped the rendered view became over-crowded, bloblike, and difficult > to read. > > - Unification of footway/path and rendering surface of them > > The mess that is highway=path is well-known[4], and it is necessary > to do some kind of processing as a data consumer. A distinction is > now made between paved and unpaved footways. > > - Rendering of Antartic ice sheets from shapefiles #1540 > > Ice sheets in Antartica are a bit of a special case, and pre-generated > shapefiles are now used > > - Mapnik 3 preperations #1579 > > The style is not yet fullly tested with Mapnik 3 and we don't claim to > support it, but several bugs were fixed. Most of the work was done on > the Mapnik side > > - No longer rendering proposed roads #1663 #1654 > > - Power area colour adjusted #1680 > > - Better place label order #1689 > > - meadow/grassland and orchard/vineyard color unification #1655 > > - Render educational area borders later #1662 > > - New POI icons > > A full list of changes can be found on Github at > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/compare/v2.31.0...v2.33.0) > > [1]: > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/647#issuecomment-52816195 > [2]: http://sk53-osm.blogspot.ca/2014/09/woodland-cartography.html > [3]: http://www.imagico.de/map/jsdotpattern.php > [4]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333 > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Looking for well mapped rural area and well mapped town/city
I can recommend most of East Yorkshire in the UK http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/53.8689/-0.6582. It's very well mapped, most fields are traced, landuse, buildings, etc.. Tony On 22 July 2015 at 10:30, Simone Cortesi wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: >> >> I am looking for well mapped rural area. I located some places but all >> are either missing major features (like part of landuse) or quality of >> mapping (especially landuses) is poor. >> >> I am interested in places mapped better than my current test locations > > > maybe relevant: http://bestofosm.org/ > > -- > -S > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] online survey about the OSM community
I don't think it's a phishing attempt, apart from giving your email address at the end if you want to get an amazon voucher, there is not much that can be used to identify you. I have to admit, the questions were a little odd and somewhat personal, but guessing the research is what motivates people to contribute and what sort of people they are. Tony On 20 August 2014 10:27, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > I have to admit I filled the thing in - I assumed the middle questions were > perhaps psychology related (psychology of OSM users, etc). > It never asks for name, email address, phone, place of work etc, town etc. - > just age. > > Didn't really strike me as phishing. > > What do people think about this - I'll delete my cookies etc "just in case" > it is phishing and run an antivirus scan but does anyone recommend doing > anything else? > > Thanks, > Nick > > -"Jaakko Helleranta.com" wrote: - > To: Clifford Snow > From: "Jaakko Helleranta.com" > Date: 19/08/2014 09:38PM > Cc: Talk Openstreetmap , cdimo...@mail.sdsu.edu > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] online survey about the OSM community > > I too found the questions in the middle of the survey a bit odd. .. To the > extent that I needed to re-read the email about the study + the Research > page of the wiki to evaluate if this was a valid research of just an odd > phishing attempt. And while I ended up trusting that this is a legit request > I am copying this to cdimo...@mail.sdsu.edu (try to) ensure that this is > actually the case. > > My last question (=feedback request) included thoughts that when researching > OSM it would be a good idea to include the research plan (and I'd add that a > link to some actual web page where hopefully there is a notion about the > research in question). Specifically it would be highly appreciated if > possible attachments e.g. to financing entities (related business(es) I > would assume primarily) could be listed. .. Or it would be noted that such > information can not be released. > Additionally it would be great if the research would be open in nature > including at least some level of openness in the data (responses). That is, > more than the traditional openness of the analysis. > > This said, I hope I wasn't fooled into giving out information about myself > that is actually easily identifiable. .. And if I was fooled than the lesson > is on me. > > If -- as I assume (and hope) -- this is a valid research then I look forward > to reading the results. And hopefully seeing some of the collected data > openly available. > > Should we have a Code of Ethics for researching the OSM community? > > -Jaakko > > -- > jaa...@helleranta.com * Skype: jhelleranta * Mobile: +505-8845-3391 > (Nicaragua) * Voice(mail) / SMS / What's app: +1-202-730-9778 * > http://about.me/jaakkoh > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Clifford Snow > wrote: >> >> I had the same issue. It stopped being about OSM. Which made me suspect >> that his intent was other than what was announced. >> >> I'd be willing to help the OP if he was agreeable to suggestions. >> >> Clifford >> >> Typos by tablrt >> >> On Aug 19, 2014 11:15 AM, "Lester Caine" wrote: >>> >>> On 19/08/14 17:47, OSMR wrote: >>> > Thank you in advance for your potential participation and apologies for >>> > the lengthy message in case you are not interested. >>> >>> I gave up before I got half way - just seems like a load of useless >>> crap? Anybody actually managed the whole thing? >>> >>> -- >>> Lester Caine - G8HFL >>> - >>> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact >>> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk >>> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ >>> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk >>> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk >>> >>> ___ >>> talk mailing list >>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] UK is turning blue?
:-) Hit refresh, it seems to be fixed now. On 18 August 2014 10:17, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > The endless rain of 2014 might though ;-) > > (sorry for the flippant comment) > > -SomeoneElse wrote: - > To: talk@openstreetmap.org > From: SomeoneElse > Date: 17/08/2014 09:41PM > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] UK is turning blue? > > On 17/08/2014 20:34, Ruben Maes wrote: >> It's doing it again – the UK is going blue once more! >> >> Does anyone know what the problem is? Last time, was it a broken >> coastline in the end? > > The "Coastline" view in OSMI http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/ suggests a > self-intersection problem roughly here: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch2#map=20/56.68761/-6.09413 > > Not sure if a self-intersection would cause this flooding though... > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-GB] UK is turning blue?
I was also about to report this, I noticed this last night. It seems that there is a gap in the coastline somewhere I initially thought it was something I did, as I was editing the coastline around Runcorn/North Wales a few days ago but I can't find any issues after some time searching, and the coastline is all connected up correctly (it seems). It looks like it's actually spread across the entire country, and as Mapnik is rerendering tiles it's being broken. I've tried the coastline validator tool, and also downloaded large parts of the coastline into JOSM but can't find the error. Does anyone know what else we can do here? Tony On 18 June 2014 08:27, Colin Smale wrote: > > > It only appears to be happening on areas with the "default" landuse - > residential, farms etc are rendered normally. That might be a clue. So far > it seems to be limited to an area in central England but it may spread. The > boundaries of the area are straight, and along tile boundaries. It only > appears at z11-z13. On this map, the left half is "blue" (last rendered June > 17) and the right half is "normal" (last rendered June 10). > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/52.0770/-0.7172 > > > > On 2014-06-18 01:10, Michael Kugelmann wrote: > > Am 18.06.2014 00:41, schrieb Colin Smale: > > why the UK is turning blue on openstreetmap.org? > > Flood due to massive rain? Heavy tide?;-) > > Maybe the coastline is broken (or was changed) or something like that... > > > Cheers, > Michael. > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > talk...@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot
On 27/09/12 16:56, Hendrik Oesterlin wrote: > "Tony Morris" wrote on 27/09/2012 at 17:46:53 +1100 > subject "[OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot" : > >> On 27/09/12 16:30, Hendrik Oesterlin wrote: >>> "Tony Morris" tonymor...@gmail.com wrote on 27/09/2012 at 16:29:23 +1100 >>> subject "[OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot" : >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> I am trying to get the OSM data prior to the running of the deletion >>>> bot. I am able to access CC-BY-SA licenced data from geofabrik, but the >>>> deletion occurred prior to the licence change. Is it possible to access >>>> this data, even if it is by region? Thanks for any tips. >>> http://download.geofabrik.de/ gives you all what you need... >>> >> I don't see pre-deletion data there. Only the latest CC-BY-SA data. > Strange... > > You don't have the line > > "osm-before-redaction/ 2012-07-26 18:17 - pre-redaction OpenStreetMap data, > CC-BY-SA licensed" > > pointing to http://download.geofabrik.de/osm-before-redaction/ > > ??? > I am blind in my bottom eye, sorry! -- Tony Morris http://tmorris.net/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot
On 27/09/12 16:50, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/27/12 08:46, Tony Morris wrote: >>> http://download.geofabrik.de/ gives you all what you need... > >> I don't see pre-deletion data there. Only the latest CC-BY-SA data. > > The "pre-redaction" link on that page is what you are looking for. > > Geofabrik downloads currently come in three flavours > > * current, ODbL > * latest version before license change, CC-BY-SA, > * pre-redaction version, CC-BY-SA. > > The middle one, the latest version before the license change, will > soon be dropped and replaced by a redirect to an information page, but > the pre-redaction version will probably be around for a while yet. > > Bye > Frederik > Ah thanks very much. -- Tony Morris http://tmorris.net/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot
On 27/09/12 16:30, Hendrik Oesterlin wrote: > "Tony Morris" tonymor...@gmail.com wrote on 27/09/2012 at 16:29:23 +1100 > subject "[OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot" : > >> Hello, >> I am trying to get the OSM data prior to the running of the deletion >> bot. I am able to access CC-BY-SA licenced data from geofabrik, but the >> deletion occurred prior to the licence change. Is it possible to access >> this data, even if it is by region? Thanks for any tips. > http://download.geofabrik.de/ gives you all what you need... > I don't see pre-deletion data there. Only the latest CC-BY-SA data. -- Tony Morris http://tmorris.net/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Pre-delete-bot
Hello, I am trying to get the OSM data prior to the running of the deletion bot. I am able to access CC-BY-SA licenced data from geofabrik, but the deletion occurred prior to the licence change. Is it possible to access this data, even if it is by region? Thanks for any tips. -- Tony Morris http://tmorris.net/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] UK coastline problem
I loaded the Openstreetmap UK map onto my Garmin Legend HCx and, on a visit to the island of Guernsey, I could see from it that the OSM version of the coastline, for at least the NE area of the island, seemed to be only a poor approximation of the actual shape. This was confirmed when I traced the OSM version of that section of coastline in Mapsource, saved it as a GPX track, added to a Google satellite image and compared it with that version. As I have only learned to make contributions through Potlatch I do not have the resources or knowledge to correct this problem. Is there anyone I can contact who might be able to assist? Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Schengen boundaries
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: >> How to tag "Schengen" boundaries within EU? There should be some >> difference between e.g. Polish eastern and western borders. > I'm guessing it should be the other way round. Countries have borders > and Schengen is a relation associating all the countries... > That way we won't accedently forget some of the borders in south > america, for example... I'm not so sure we can model it is a relation between countries, unless we have a way of excluding parts of some countries. In most Schengen cases it's more of a philosophical issue than a practical one, as most of the exclusions are places that don't have land boundaries with other members, but there are a few that do, such as Büsingen. (Although I'm not sure whether that is a permanent exclusion, or just temporary until Switzerland implements). It's also important to remember that it's not really an EU thing at all. Some EU countries aren't members, and some non-EU countries are. The most important of these if we're going to render borders differently is Norway (Iceland is slightly different by virtue of being an island, and Switzerland, although a signatory, hasn't implemented yet). But if we're going to render borders differently between countries that have a common travel area, we're going to need to do it for more than Schengen, anyway. Just adding an extra tag to the border way to say whether it's an open border or a closed border seems much simpler than trying to model relationships at a country level. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] voting ended? - population
Martin Trautmann wrote:
> precision could be v={1|10|100|h|1000|k|1|10k|10|100k|100|M|1M}>
>
> Whenever you have just a single number, this should be the current value -
> but you won't know whether this number is outdated by a day, a month or
> many years.
Both of these seem to be unnecessarily overcomplicating the issue.
We're not trying to become some sort of definitive source for population
data. And such data is fundamentally unsuited for this level of
precision anyway. Beyond the tiny village where everyone knows anyone
else, population counts are always estimates and out of date. In some
cities the range of values being thrown around span millions of people
(Lagos for example).
AIUI there is no proposal to be doing anything with this data other than
giving rendering hints. If so, then there's no real problem with either
out of date data or crude estimates. And, when better data is available,
it's trivial to change it.
Tony
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] I've removed historic=icon from map features
Robin Paulson wrote: >> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildstock > of course, i remember seeing these in austria now. yes, they are quite > prominent aren't they and maybe map-worthy after all - would you be > willing to put a proposal up on the wiki? unfortunately, i can't speak > german or i'd do it Why does it need a proposal? It was already on Map Features until a unilateral decision to remove it. Now that it's been explained what it is, why not just put it back and document it? Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] I've removed historic=icon from map features
Robin Paulson wrote: >>> After - I think - three questions over the last months about >>> historic=icon on this list - with no real response - I just removed it >>> from the map features page. >>> If some one comes up with a good explanation what this is we might put >>> it back later, but in the meantime this was only confusing ... >> Was my explanation not valid? > it was valid, but they're not really map-worthy. if we go down that > route, where do we stop? every painting? That may be a valid reason to remove it, and I'd almost certainly agree with it. Saying that it was removed because there was no real response or no good explanation of what it is, is rather different, though. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] I've removed historic=icon from map features
Ulf Lamping wrote: > After - I think - three questions over the last months about > historic=icon on this list - with no real response - I just removed it > from the map features page. > If some one comes up with a good explanation what this is we might put > it back later, but in the meantime this was only confusing ... Was my explanation not valid? Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] proposal templates
Robin Paulson wrote: > further to my previous post about editing the wiki, are there any > mediawiki gurus here? > a set of templates (or even one!) for proposals would save a lot of > time, does anyone feel like volunteering to create one? hopefully, > this would give some guidelines for people when proposing tags, and > save a lot of time currently wasted on cleanups Unless I'm misunderstanding what we need here, Mediawiki Templates aren't quite what we want: we want something more akin to Templates in Word, where you 'clone' the template and then edit it to what you want. Mediawiki templates require passing in arguments to the call to them, which isn't really suitable for large clumps of text. We might be better installing one of these: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Inputbox http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CreateArticle These would allow us to create a little 'form' that people can type into when proposing a feature, that will then create the relevant wiki page. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] voting open - museum
Robin Paulson wrote: > yes. there are dozens of inconsistencies in the tags, but the tag > system is still in it's infancy, we're making it up as we go along and > writing the guidelines day-by-day. > problem is, there are very few people managing the tag proposals > system and they don't have time/the > inclination/wherewithal/inspiration/experience/whatever for writing > guidelines/creating templates. more bodies is always good That sounds like a good reason to try to fix it at a slightly higher level, by having a default that says that everything within certain keys (tourism, historic, amenity, shop, etc) can be both nodes and areas unless explicitly agreed otherwise. Is it possible to get agreement on a bigger scale than making one by one requests for about 50 elements currently on Map Features that can currently only be nodes but could sensibly also be areas? (Plus lots on proposed features) Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in
Robin Paulson wrote: >> Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can >> be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this? > yes. some examples: > i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia? There are other examples at even this high a level as well. Parts of France are in South America (lots of people are surprised to find that Brazil has a land border with the EU). Parts of Spain are in Africa (Melilla, Ceuta, etc). And there lots of towns or cities that are in different geographic countries than administrative ones (Campione and Büsingen are Italian and German towns in Switzerland, Llívia a Spanish town in France, etc) Usually these are enclaves or exclaves, so slightly easier to deal with, but we need to constantly remember that the world is a very tricky thing to model, with large numbers of quirky edge cases. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] voting open - museum
Robin Paulson wrote: > this proposal is for two things: a new tag, tourism=museum and the > deprecation of the old tag, historic=museum > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Museum I was going to comment on the page, but it seems like a wider issue. Why are some things like this only for nodes, and others for areas? Currently a museum is only a node and I'm not sure why - they're often quite big, taking the space of at least a block or two. For a rather bizarre example, an intact castle is only a node, but the ruins of a castle can be an area. Is there previous discussion on this somewhere? Would it not make sense to allow all amenity / shop / tourism / historic etc to be areas unless specifically decided otherwise? Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding vmap0 road data to OSM
Christopher Schmidt wrote: > Still, it's an obvious way for > users to quickly get an idea that they may be able to contribute: in > areas where there is no existing data, vmap0 can provide a reason for > people to participate. I think the key question here is: are users more likely to fix data that's wrong, or to add data that's missing? I don't have an answer to that. I suspect for wikis in general it's the first, but moving misplaced roads in OSM is harder than an average wiki edit, so I'm even less sure here. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Freemap - now using standard tiling system with wider range of zoom levels
Nick Whitelegg wrote: > Freemap ... starts with a map of the > whole UK making it easier to locate any part of the country. As long as you don't want to go further north than Edinburgh? Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Recent Potlatch changes
David Dean wrote: > Also, whilst I am in mood for constructive criticism :) is it possible > to make it so the autocomplete works more like excel in that if there > is only one autocomplete option valid it actually fills out the > remainder of the text box but is highlighted so it can be typed over. > This way you can just tab to the next field once you have entered > 'hig' instead of them having to hit up arrow before leaving the field. You can already achieve this effect if you use 'enter' to move between cells rather than 'tab'. I've trained myself to do that anyway, as TAB has had a nasty habit of not actually saving the final value. So if you start typing 'le', say, and then hit enter it will become 'leisure' and move to the value field, where you can type 'pi' and hit return and have 'pitch'. It would be nice if this worked with TAB as well, of course, but in the meantime if you can retrain your fingers then you can avoid that up-arrow. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Yahoo's imagery VS Google's imagery?
Yann wrote: > There was a guy from google at SOTM so I assume we did, but just to make > sure: did we actually asked google if we could use their imagery? It's > just so much better than the one yahoo provides... In lots of places, yes, Google's imagery is a LOT better than Yahoo's, particularly in cities. But there are also quite a few places where Yahoo provides traceable imagery in locations where Google doesn't, mostly outside cities. It's not quite as simple as breadth vs depth but I'd hope that if we got permission to use Google then we'd provide both, not just switch over. Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] route pub_crawl
Rob Reid wrote: > More generically a pub crawl consists of visiting a series of pubs > according to some pre-arranged plan or theme. There are also competitive versions where the goal is complete the entire 'route' as quickly as possible, having downed a pint / shot / pint+shot / whatever in each location. A favourite of many a freshers' week is the Three-legged golf pub crawl, where teams of two have one leg each tied together and and they have to down a shot apiece at each of 18 pubs. (Less versions allow them to alternate the shots.) Tony ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] UK 'C' roads, 'ref', and Potlatch
In Potlatch setting a road to be 'tertiary' doesn't give a 'ref' option like primary/secondary/etc. (Actually, worse than that, it actively *removes* any ref that's already set on it.) Setting ref=C263, for example, makes potlatch change its input box from Tertiary to '(no preset)'. I see from the wiki[1] that there has been some discussion as to what 'tertiary' is meant to mean, but (in the UK at least) it seems that in most cases roads that we know are 'C' roads should be marked as this, and where the number is known[2] it seems to make sense to add it. I'm not sure though whether this is just a feature request for Potlatch, or whether there's previous discussion that led to its current behaviour. Thoughts? Tony [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway%3Dtertiary [2] Although they're only rarely signposted as such, official government documents (for example roadworks notifications, planning applications, building schemes, etc. often reference them) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
