Re: [Talk-transit] Railway. Source= GPS
Hi Frankie Where are you mapping? Most of the UK train lines should already be fairly well mapped. In my area they are mapped, but definitely not well. The line traces are so zig-zaggy instead of curves, that on a couple of occasions they've clashed with roads rivers. I shall try in the vestibule next time Thanks Dave F. From: Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com To: Public transport/transit/shared taxi related topics talk-transit@openstreetmap.org Sent: Friday, 25 September, 2009 9:04:25 Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] Railway. Source= GPS Hi Dave, Some people have found more luck getting a GPS signal in the carriage ends (I believe they're called the vestibules?) - however it's a pretty uncomfortable journey stood their the entire time. Otherwise, it simply depends on the type of train (some are more shielded than others), and, I guess, the type of GPS device (ones with bigger aerials might cope better). Also, I think it helps if you get a GPS fix before getting on the train - they seem to have more difficulty getting a fix when moving at high speed (or at least mine does). Where are you mapping? Most of the UK train lines should already be fairly well mapped. Frankie 2009/9/25 d f fac63te...@yahoo.com Hi I've seen a few railway ways where it says the source is GPS. I've tried a couple of times but got absolutely no signal. I guess the roof of the carriages are shielded. Short of sticking an aerial on the roof or walking the tracks, what tips could you give me to get a recording of my journey? Cheers Dave F. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[Talk-transit] Railway. Source= GPS
Hi I've seen a few railway ways where it says the source is GPS. I've tried a couple of times but got absolutely no signal. I guess the roof of the carriages are shielded. Short of sticking an aerial on the roof or walking the tracks, what tips could you give me to get a recording of my journey? Cheers Dave F. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
My Lord! What happened to my question?!? You lot don't half go on. :-) Back to basics: Are we all agreed that, in principle, it would be better to be able to have a single bridge to carry multiple ways? http://osm.org/go/eukOONRtk-- http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ie=UTF8ll=51.380995,-2.350388spn=0.075105,0.16531z=13 To answer Martin's query about a bridges independence: When editing, if you selected a bridge moved it, it wouldn't move any of the ways going over. It was more an off the top of my head comment really. Would having it independent make it easier for the renderers? Would it affect routers? Would a route be described as cross this bridge, then turn left in 200 metres? It would certain save time splitting the ways. If there are reasons why the bridge needs to be tagged with the different types of ways please let me know. The bridge would have a width tag which the mapper would adjust to suit all ways, thus saving the renderer the calculation. Can I check? Are there people here who are suggesting that, in my case, they want to draw all four ways (yes, I know the footpath hasn't been mapped yet) as a single way specify the differences with lane tags? Also I thought street was a band word anybody quoting it was given a slap on the wrist told to go stand on the naughty step :-) Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
Oh dear, I, of course, meant banned not band. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
From: Anthony o...@inbox.org To: d f fac63te...@yahoo.com Cc: OSM Talk talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, 21 September, 2009 15:20:43 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways? I think the important question is, does it add information? Probably so. A bridge really is more than just a collection of ways. It might be significantly larger than the ways on it. A bridge should probably have its own geometry. And if a bridge has its own geometry (polygon or line and width) and a layer tag you don't even need the relation, do you? Anything in the area of the bridge with the same layer is located on the bridge. +1 The only issue I see is when when a bridge only consists of a single way, it'd be a pain to add *another* way, with the same geometry, to represent the bridge. So the renderers would have to special case this. Maybe +1 Okay, I have a proposal. I can bet some people are going to hate me for it, but I'm going to propose it anyway... amenity=bridge (or would it be landuse=bridge?), to be attached to a way or polygon. layer tag is used to indicate the layer. If a bridge is equivalent to a single way, you can attach amenity/landuse=bridge to the way (after splitting) instead of creating a separate way. bridge=yes could, and probably should, still be attached to the way. It will indicate that the way is *on* (over?) a bridge, not that the way *is* a bridge. No relations, unless you want to add them as redundant information to make it easier to calculate which ways are on which bridges (but this can be obtained from the geometry, the layer tag, and the bridge tag). Would it affect routers? Would a route be described as cross this bridge, then turn left in 200 metres? I doubt most routers are going to bother with information that isn't part of the way or the nodes directly on the way. To be clearer I should have said Turn left 200 metres after crossing this river To answer my own question, I think they would use such vernacular. It would certain save time splitting the ways. The way should probably still be split, at least to add the layer tag, and arguably to add the bridge=yes, which indicates that the way is indeed on a bridge. I've spent so much time splitting ways for bridges so it's with regret that I agree they need to be split to define layers. +1 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
Hi I have a bridge carrying a cycle lane, dual carriage way (with central reservtion) footpath. As far as I can see is they each need there own bridge the result gets a bit crowded. Is there a way to simplify this? If the bright was independent it could also mean that the ways wouldn't need to be split! Saving a hell of a lot of work. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Train station names: Place Station ou just Place ?
I believe the usage of the building should be explicitly defined, so station should be used. Most people who disagree are discussing it from the point of view of using the map for the sole purpose of using a train. This is not the case. My home town station has the same name as at least two other establishments in the city. The label for each of those needs to be explicit. Imagine the problem for a tourist trying to find the hotel with the same name but turns up at the station! Cheers Dave F. From: Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com To: talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Friday, 18 September, 2009 9:02:54 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Train station names: Place Station ou just Place ? Pieren pieren3 at gmail.com writes: What is the actual convention about railway stations names ? do we have to write the word Station in the name itself or not ? Is it not implied by the tag railway=station or building=train_station ? Following the general rule that the name shouldn't duplicate information from other tags, I would suggest omitting it, just as 'Holy Trinity' is usually better than 'Holy Trinity Church'. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ 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] Train station names: Place Station ou just Place ?
Hi Emilie/Elena I see your point of view. Thanks Dave F. From: Elena of Valhalla elena.valha...@gmail.com To: d f fac63te...@yahoo.com Sent: Friday, 18 September, 2009 14:51:54 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Train station names: Place Station ou just Place ? On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 3:20 PM, d f fac63te...@yahoo.com wrote: My home town station has the same name as at least two other establishments in the city. The label for each of those needs to be explicit. Imagine the problem for a tourist trying to find the hotel with the same name but turns up at the station! that's what icons (on a printed / rendered map) or category (in a search tool) or tag (in the data) are for; otherwise we could just put everything in the name tag and forget about any other tag. -- Elena ``of Valhalla'' homepage: http://www.trueelena.org email: elena.valha...@gmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] JOSM display is squashed
Hi I've downloaded some data to JOSM but the data is squashed in appearance in the north-south direction. It causes inaccuracies when I map. For instance i drew a rectangle at about 45 degrees, but when it showed in mapnik it looked like a parallelogram. I've downloaded the latest Java JOSM. Any ideas for a solution? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)
John Surely if a way needs shifting, it needs shifting, irrelevant of what the source was? - I've seen people, quite rightly, removing nonsensical source tags such as Source=JOSM/Potlatch!! JOSM Ptlatch are _not_ the source, just the means by which to input the data into OSM. The wiki page for source doesn't, for some strange reason, include GPS in its list of Core Values. Any idea why? If I was to add a source tag I would quite often use My Eyes, which to me is the most important way of collecting data. Dave F. From: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com To: Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Tuesday, 8 September, 2009 11:42:24 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...) 2009/9/8 Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com: Hi, I can see that Potlach support source tag but JOSM doesn't. You can see the example here: http://bayimg.com/image/dadjnaacm.jpg Do you use source tag? Why and how, please explain? I read the wiki page but I don't see many people use it and I'm wondering why. Annoying isn't it, I wish everyone would tag the source of everything properly so roads don't get shifted because people assume it was from low-res sat etc depending where it is. ___ 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] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)
...without the right information being presented to later users. Not sure what you men by that. However... If there are 10 traces by GPS for a way I think it's out of alignment from the average of them, then I would move it. Irrelevant of what the source tag for the way. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)
From: Donald Allwright donald_allwri...@yahoo.com To: d f fac63te...@yahoo.com Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Tuesday, 8 September, 2009 16:25:41 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...) If there are 10 traces by GPS for a way I think it's out of alignment from the average of them, then I would move it. Irrelevant of what the source tag for the way. Please don't do this unless you have clear evidence it's wrong, you could well be messing up perfectly accurate data. I course I wouldn't. I never said I would. It should go without saying that amendments should only be made with prior knowledge of the area. What if all 10 people walked down the same side of a wide street, and made an estimate of the necessary offset of the centre line? In this case you'd be messing up data that were already accurate. Unless you take your own GPS trace, you can't be sure if that's happened or not. I have in the past done this and walked across the street at one point in order to get a reference for the width, then added a deliberate offset accordingly. That is one technique I use also to make my mapping as accurate as possible. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)
You don't have access to the 10 traces, Yes I would. In Potlatch if I press G or click the GPS icon it display all uploaded traces. I should have said assuming none uploads the information how do you know your information is any better than what already exists in the system? I don't. But I take the average of all the traces available. i thought this is what we were meant to do! I'm sure I read it in the wiki somewhere. Why would your information be more accurate if no one sourced where their information came from. It wouldn't! I never said it would. However just because someone tags theirs as being from a certain source doesn't make it necessarily more accurate than mine. For example Simply put you can't know, you can only assume your information is better if there is no source information present. If you take your policy I don't understand how anything can be updated once it been initially mapped! General point about how I map: I use a GPS (not the most accurate in the world) I take photographs _use_ them. I take notes in a notepad. most importantly. I use my _eyes_ I've seen roads especially railway lines, that I have knowledge of, that are mapped so inaccurately, such as curves being mapped in a single point, that if the vehicle/train was doing more than 20 mile an hour it would run off the road/rail. I don't see the problem in amending that. Even if there are no other traces irrelevant of the source tag. To clarify, if i didn't have knowledge of it, but still looked wrong. i wouldn't amended it. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-transit] pay_scale_area
Heh. Sounds a bit like the geo information which is captured in the Open Plaques project (http://www.openplaques.org/) which I run... Ah! I saw your Freedom Of Information request on What Do They Know for Bath. I assume you sent requests to all authorities. Were there any that didn't/were able to supply the info? Cheers Dave F. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] pay_scale_area
Thank you for the welcome First off a couple of queries about transit talk. Is T-T purely email client based or is there a web page listing the posts? I receive a digest of previous posts can't see a way to reply individually to specific posts, where I get the Re: in the subject box. The area in question is Bath the specific problem I'm referring to is: http://osm.org/go/eukj3FJ_ My initial response would be to agree with Chris M. query whether it should be included in the main database. It does seem to get in the way a bit. However, being a newbie, I'm willing to hear arguments for it. I'm sure there have been many discussion about what should/shouldn't be added. I think it's only a matter of time before I come across a POI that proudly proclaims - This is the spot where Sandra Hutchinson first let me stick my hand up her jumper :-) Cheers Dave F. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] pay_scale_area
@ Chris M. Excuse my ignorance but what is a namespaced tag? I can't see an explanation in the Wiki. Thanks Dave F. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
