Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
2009/11/25 Frederik Ramm > Hi, > > Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote: > > El Martes, 24 de Noviembre de 2009, Frederik Ramm escribió: > >> Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". > > > > Am I the only one who has read that as "60 nanometers"? > > No, a certain Martin K. has already reported the same. I'd say it > depends on context; nm is often, if sloppily, used in aviation at least, > but since sub-meter precision isn't required there, nobody will misread it. > +1. It's hard to misread and if you think instead of reading like a computer you will get it, stil it literally reads "nanometer", while Nautical Miles officially should abbr. NM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautical_mile (they also say *M*, *Nm* or *nmi) *but I wouldn't use Nm either, as this is the official abbr. for energy (Newton metres =Joule). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
Andrew Errington wrote: > When I slide the aerial photos around (by holding the space bar) the > photo layer jumps around and seem to snap to positions far away > from where the mouse is. This didn't used to happen. > > I'm sure this is not the right place to file a bug report Please post a ticket at http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ - it's very difficult to keep track of reports if they come in through 87634 different avenues. Thanks! cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Potlatch-1.3-tp26475933p26509551.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
Hi, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote: > El Martes, 24 de Noviembre de 2009, Frederik Ramm escribió: >> Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". > > Am I the only one who has read that as "60 nanometers"? No, a certain Martin K. has already reported the same. I'd say it depends on context; nm is often, if sloppily, used in aviation at least, but since sub-meter precision isn't required there, nobody will misread it. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
I'm still reading it "nanometers" even after reading your email and after spending 7 months in a flight simulator company! 2009/11/24 Iván Sánchez Ortega > El Martes, 24 de Noviembre de 2009, Frederik Ramm escribió: > > Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". > > Am I the only one who has read that as "60 nanometers"? > > > -- > -- > Iván Sánchez Ortega > > http://ivan.sanchezortega.es > Proudly running Debian Linux with 2.6.31-1-amd64 kernel, KDE 3.5.10, and > PHP > 5.2.11-1 generating this signature. > Uptime: 02:34:07 up 8 days, 23:27, 4 users, load average: 0.36, 0.34, > 0.36 > > ___ > 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] Potlatch 1.3
El Martes, 24 de Noviembre de 2009, Frederik Ramm escribió: > Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". Am I the only one who has read that as "60 nanometers"? -- -- Iván Sánchez Ortega http://ivan.sanchezortega.es Proudly running Debian Linux with 2.6.31-1-amd64 kernel, KDE 3.5.10, and PHP 5.2.11-1 generating this signature. Uptime: 02:34:07 up 8 days, 23:27, 4 users, load average: 0.36, 0.34, 0.36 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
On Wed, November 25, 2009 07:40, Peter Miller wrote: > > 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. :( When I slide the aerial photos around (by holding the space bar) the photo layer jumps around and seem to snap to positions far away from where the mouse is. This didn't used to happen. I'm sure this is not the right place to file a bug report, but since we're talking about v1.3... Andrew ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
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
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:41 AM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/11/24 Anthony : >> Nevermind. That's about half an inch, and it doesn't seem to be less >> than a pixel (at my latitude/longitude, anyway). For some reason last >> time i calculated it I thought it was more. > > You should use metric it's easier since metric distances were based on > a rough approximation of the circumference of the earth ;) I did, but then I stuck the result (of 0.0110574 meters) into Google "0.0110574 meters to inches" to convert it into inches. I guess if I had thought about it 1.1 cm is also reasonable. 0.011 meters just didn't strike me as anything useful. I should have thought about it more. I believe my mistake the first time around was to use 1*10^-6 instead of 1*10^-7, because I came up with about 1/3 of a foot (which is approximately the length of 1*10^-6 degree of longitude in Tampa). I don't remember, because I came up with that several weeks ago, and only the end result of 1/3 foot stuck in my head. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
2009/11/23 Richard Fairhurst > Hi all, > > I'm pleased to announce Potlatch 1.3 - a new version with one major > improvement. > > 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. > great news. I'm very pleased to hear so soon from this :D cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
2009/11/24 John Smith : > 1 nautical mile is exactly 1852m Sorry, it was set to 1853m. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautical_mile ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
2009/11/24 Frederik Ramm : > Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". One nautical mile is exactly one minute of Because they estimated the circumference to 36,000km, but it's over 40,000km > arc. Say again which system was naturally suited for all things geo? 1 nautical mile is exactly 1852m Actual circumference of the earth: 40,075.02 KM (equatorial) 40,007.86 KM (meridional) 40,041.47 KM (mean) 1.852*60*360 = 40003.2 Yet another close approximation. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
Hi, John Smith wrote: > You should use metric it's easier since metric distances were based on > a rough approximation of the circumference of the earth ;) > > 1 degree of latitude and at the equator, 1 degree of longitude ~= > 100km Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". One nautical mile is exactly one minute of arc. Say again which system was naturally suited for all things geo? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
2009/11/24 Anthony : > Nevermind. That's about half an inch, and it doesn't seem to be less > than a pixel (at my latitude/longitude, anyway). For some reason last > time i calculated it I thought it was more. You should use metric it's easier since metric distances were based on a rough approximation of the circumference of the earth ;) 1 degree of latitude and at the equator, 1 degree of longitude ~= 100km, so every decimal place from there is an order of magnitude less. 0.1 ~= 10km 0.01 ~= 1km 0.001 ~= 100m 0.0001 ~= 10m 0.1 ~= 1m 0.01 ~= 10cm 0.001 ~= 1cm An inch was standardised based on metric :) 1 inch = 2.54cm exactly ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Anthony wrote: > 2009/11/23 Iván Sánchez Ortega : >> 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!" >> >> :-P > > On that note, snapping to the nearest 0.001 degrees would be > appreciated, since that is (I believe) the smallest resolution > currently allowed by the OSM database, and is (usually, I believe) > less than one pixel at z23. > Nevermind. That's about half an inch, and it doesn't seem to be less than a pixel (at my latitude/longitude, anyway). For some reason last time i calculated it I thought it was more. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
2009/11/23 Iván Sánchez Ortega : > 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!" > > :-P On that note, snapping to the nearest 0.001 degrees would be appreciated, since that is (I believe) the smallest resolution currently allowed by the OSM database, and is (usually, I believe) less than one pixel at z23. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
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!" :-P -- -- Iván Sánchez Ortega Un ordenador no es un televisor ni un microondas, es una herramienta compleja. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm pleased to announce Potlatch 1.3 - a new version with one major > improvement. > > Potlatch now lets you zoom in as far as zoom level 23. Excellent news. Thank you Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.3
Hi all, I'm pleased to announce Potlatch 1.3 - a new version with one major improvement. 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. This makes Potlatch much more suitable for tracing buildings, and other fine detail, from high quality aerial imagery like the NearMap imagery available in Australia. Don't forget that there's the option to 'Use thin lines at all scales' to make high-resolution work easier, too. A fair amount of the scaling code has been reworked to cope with this, so if you spot any mishaps on the way, reports at http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ are welcome as usual. This might be the last major revision of Potlatch 1.x - because work is now well underway on Potlatch 2, which is a complete rewrite with some whizzy new features. But more on that anon! cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
