Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Here's another example where it fails to spider because it doesn't want to cross, or even get close to, paved dips at intersection boundaries, no doubt because it thinks they are sidewalks. That should probably be a pattern it is sensitive to (roadColor-borderColor-roadColor) and allow it to go through it. It will occasionally generate non-existing intersections where a perp intersection is separated only by a single sidewalk, but these are rare IME. Also note the way (33.4587097, -117.1022644)-(33.4588280, -117.1024399). Not sure what this was supposed to be. Maybe the short dead-end heading ESE from near the second point? Note that it doesn't complete the road between the two given points, despite the fact that they are within about 10cm of the centerline endpoints (pt1 the center of the circle that fits the cul-de-sac and pt2 the intersection of the two centerlines). Future improvement thought: when it sees the road flare left and/or right just before an intersection, ignore the flare and draw the intersection where it would be if the corners came to right angles. This will prevent a lot of deviated intersections like the one at (33.4588280, -117.1024399), reducing complexity and improving appearance. http://3667a17de9b94ccf8fd278f9de62dae4.cloudapp.net/DetectRoad.svc/explore/?pt1=33.4583630,-117.1031114&pt2=33.4578704,-117.1037238&bbox=33.467,-117.109,33.452,-117.091 -- Alan Mintz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
BTW and FYI, I just committed to Merkaartor trunk the initial implementation of the tool... On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 16:13, Chris Browet wrote: > Wouldn't it be easier for clients to just return the querying values as > start and end node? > > - Chris - > > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 15:26, John-Michael Wiley > wrote: > >> I think they are actually the same, the return results are simply >> rounded to the nearest 10 millionth of a degree. We could keep more digits >> if needed. In my editor prototype I simply do a small delta comparison. We >> can modify the code to keep more significant digits if need be. >> >> >> >> J.M. >> >> >> >> *From:* christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] *On >> Behalf Of *Chris Browet >> *Sent:* Monday, February 14, 2011 3:12 AM >> *To:* John-Michael Wiley >> *Cc:* talk@openstreetmap.org >> >> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 03:25, John-Michael Wiley >> wrote: >> >> Not sure that was helpful. >> >> Anyway, I updated the staging servers with a new build that hopefully >> addresses the issues. Give it a try and let me know if you any issue. >>- modified osmchange to osmChange >>- removed the bounds >> >> http://3667a17de9b94ccf8fd278f9de62dae4.cloudapp.net/ >> >> Hi, >> The format looks fine, thanks. >> >> Now, I have a more bugging "functional" issue: >> None of the 2 set of coordinates I specify are part of the way which is >> returned. >> >> This can be see with just the example on the page: Click "Go" and none of >> the node returned = the input nodes. >> >> Assuming a workflow of: >> 1) create 2 nodes on existing distant roads >> 2) Run Bing detector with these 2 points to join the roads >> >> Result will be unconnected roads. The start and end nodes coordinates of >> the returned road do not match the input point. >> The difference is in the order of centimeters, but still, that would force >> to implement some "duplicate node in a given radius" logic quite >> unnecessarily... >> >> Possible solution: Assume that start and end of returned way correspond to >> the input coordinates. >> Is that right? >> >> - Chris - >> >> >> > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Wouldn't it be easier for clients to just return the querying values as start and end node? - Chris - On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 15:26, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > I think they are actually the same, the return results are simply rounded > to the nearest 10 millionth of a degree. We could keep more digits if > needed. In my editor prototype I simply do a small delta comparison. We can > modify the code to keep more significant digits if need be. > > > > J.M. > > > > *From:* christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] *On > Behalf Of *Chris Browet > *Sent:* Monday, February 14, 2011 3:12 AM > *To:* John-Michael Wiley > *Cc:* talk@openstreetmap.org > > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 03:25, John-Michael Wiley > wrote: > > Not sure that was helpful. > > Anyway, I updated the staging servers with a new build that hopefully > addresses the issues. Give it a try and let me know if you any issue. >- modified osmchange to osmChange >- removed the bounds > > http://3667a17de9b94ccf8fd278f9de62dae4.cloudapp.net/ > > Hi, > The format looks fine, thanks. > > Now, I have a more bugging "functional" issue: > None of the 2 set of coordinates I specify are part of the way which is > returned. > > This can be see with just the example on the page: Click "Go" and none of > the node returned = the input nodes. > > Assuming a workflow of: > 1) create 2 nodes on existing distant roads > 2) Run Bing detector with these 2 points to join the roads > > Result will be unconnected roads. The start and end nodes coordinates of > the returned road do not match the input point. > The difference is in the order of centimeters, but still, that would force > to implement some "duplicate node in a given radius" logic quite > unnecessarily... > > Possible solution: Assume that start and end of returned way correspond to > the input coordinates. > Is that right? > > - Chris - > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 03:25, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > Not sure that was helpful. > > Anyway, I updated the staging servers with a new build that hopefully > addresses the issues. Give it a try and let me know if you any issue. >- modified osmchange to osmChange >- removed the bounds > > http://3667a17de9b94ccf8fd278f9de62dae4.cloudapp.net/ > > Hi, The format looks fine, thanks. Now, I have a more bugging "functional" issue: None of the 2 set of coordinates I specify are part of the way which is returned. This can be see with just the example on the page: Click "Go" and none of the node returned = the input nodes. Assuming a workflow of: 1) create 2 nodes on existing distant roads 2) Run Bing detector with these 2 points to join the roads Result will be unconnected roads. The start and end nodes coordinates of the returned road do not match the input point. The difference is in the order of centimeters, but still, that would force to implement some "duplicate node in a given radius" logic quite unnecessarily... Possible solution: Assume that start and end of returned way correspond to the input coordinates. Is that right? - Chris - ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
At 2011-02-03 09:17, Steve Coast wrote: http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx This is something that has the potential to greatly increase mapping productivity! A couple of things: 1. When I run the sample http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/DetectRoad.svc/detect/?pt1=47.6274924080735,-122.119339391984&pt2=47.6266897967272,-122.116431877412&bbox=47.628475815791,-122.120927259721,47.6254135470002,-122.114489958085 It produces a road segment that is not very well centered. The imagery for this area is rather good (~0.06m/pel - zoom 21) and it should be a fairly easy case. Can someone look at this? Is it being too sensitive, not sensitive enough, etc.? Can some of the internal parameters be exposed so we can play with them? 2. When I try http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/DetectRoad.svc/detect/?pt1=47.6312440,-122.1126077&pt2=47.6263360,-122.1179483&bbox=47.632,-122.119,47.625,-122.109 it complains "Error Status Code: 'BadRequest' Details: The points are too close together." Even though these points are further apart (~700m) than the ones in the example. -- Alan Mintz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:42 AM, David Murn wrote: > A program that came out of Microsoft, trying to slightly modify a > defacto file format standard, say it isnt so. Dude. It's 2011. We've moved on. Let's stop attacking Microsoft employees when they come here to do something helpful, because of some grudge from the mid 90s. Thanks, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Not sure that was helpful. Anyway, I updated the staging servers with a new build that hopefully addresses the issues. Give it a try and let me know if you any issue. - modified osmchange to osmChange - removed the bounds http://3667a17de9b94ccf8fd278f9de62dae4.cloudapp.net/ Thanks, J.M. -Original Message- From: David Murn [mailto:da...@incanberra.com.au] Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 4:42 PM To: Chris Browet Cc: John-Michael Wiley; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 19:52 +0100, Chris Browet wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 19:25, Chris Browet > wrote: > Busy implementing in Merkaartor > > A bug: > you output while it is , with a capital > "C". see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange > > - Chris - > > And, AFAIK, below is not valid. A program that came out of Microsoft, trying to slightly modify a defacto file format standard, say it isnt so. Next will come .MSO, its just like .OSM but with the subtle MicroSoft Openstreetmap changes to the existing format. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 19:52 +0100, Chris Browet wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 19:25, Chris Browet > wrote: > Busy implementing in Merkaartor > > A bug: > you output while it is , with a capital > "C". see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange > > - Chris - > > And, AFAIK, below is not valid. A program that came out of Microsoft, trying to slightly modify a defacto file format standard, say it isnt so. Next will come .MSO, its just like .OSM but with the subtle MicroSoft Openstreetmap changes to the existing format. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 19:25, Chris Browet wrote: > Busy implementing in Merkaartor > > A bug: > you output while it is , with a capital "C". see > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange > > - Chris - And, AFAIK, below is not valid. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Busy implementing in Merkaartor A bug: you output while it is , with a capital "C". see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange - Chris - On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 15:16, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > The wiki page is not clear about what the version is supposed to be, is > it for the version of OSM that output is written for or the version of the > creator? I can do either, without much trouble. > > > > J.M. > > > > *From:* SteveC [mailto:st...@asklater.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:16 PM > *To:* John-Michael Wiley > *Cc:* Chris Browet; talk@openstreetmap.org > > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with > > > > Maybe put the magicshop version number in the creator? > > Steve > > > On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:12 PM, John-Michael Wiley > wrote: > > > > I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging > servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know > if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers > tomorrow. > > > > http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ > > > > I pasted the new output below. > > > > Thanks, > > J.M. > > > > > > > maxlon="-122.116432"/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] *On > Behalf Of *Chris Browet > *Sent:* Thursday, February 03, 2011 6:47 PM > *To:* John-Michael Wiley > *Cc:* Steve Coast; talk@openstreetmap.org > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with > > > > > > I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing > tag although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to > OSM. In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map > for the user to edit and approve. I generate new id’s for the ones passed > back to me so they don’t conflict with current changes the user has already > made. > > > I personally see no advantage for switching to osm change, as all features > are new anyway, but indeed the disadvantage of being too easy to upload > "as-is", without proper review... > > - Chris - > > > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Hello Serge, I hope Richard convinced you that my intentions was purely to further the debate and not to attack anyone. It is however not the point of this email... On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > Nic, Richard has a long history with this community of being one of > our ambassadors, in every sense of the world. He's a prolific mapper, > he's been a very effective community organizer, a project leader, > conference organizer, and former Cloudmade Ambassador. Personally I'm not a fan of the Cloudmade business model. Perhaps I'm alone in this, but I think they they have distracted the community and the osm.org website and the tagging standards would have evolved a lot faster if they were not around. Regards, Nic ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On 4 February 2011 15:16, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > The wiki page is not clear about what the version is supposed to be, is it > for the version of OSM that output is written for or the version of the > creator? I can do either, without much trouble. I believe 0.6 is the expected value for version="", although it isn't documented. You can add the creator version at the end of creator="". Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
The wiki page is not clear about what the version is supposed to be, is it for the version of OSM that output is written for or the version of the creator? I can do either, without much trouble. J.M. From: SteveC [mailto:st...@asklater.com] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:16 PM To: John-Michael Wiley Cc: Chris Browet; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with Maybe put the magicshop version number in the creator? Steve On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:12 PM, John-Michael Wiley mailto:jmwi...@microsoft.com>> wrote: I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers tomorrow. http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ I pasted the new output below. Thanks, J.M. From: christian.bro...@gmail.com<mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com> [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Chris Browet Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 6:47 PM To: John-Michael Wiley Cc: Steve Coast; talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing tag although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to OSM. In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map for the user to edit and approve. I generate new id’s for the ones passed back to me so they don’t conflict with current changes the user has already made. I personally see no advantage for switching to osm change, as all features are new anyway, but indeed the disadvantage of being too easy to upload "as-is", without proper review... - Chris - ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Chris, The bounding box is the largest area we will search. Actually if the bounding box is greater than 250 tiles at level 18 (Bing Map Tile System)<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb259689.aspx> then the call will return a 400 (BadRequest). We don't want people sending the server gigantic queries and bogging it down. If you click on the explore button you can see some of the early work we are doing with the idea of exploring the map in the given region. The code is still being worked on and we will let people know when improvements are made. http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/DetectRoad.svc/explore/?pt1=47.7033391042276,-122.111653945654&pt2=47.7008480831473,-122.111600301474&bbox=47.704891419481,-122.11515154621,47.6984147099526,-122.105753085822 Thanks, J.M. From: christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Chris Browet Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 1:55 AM To: John-Michael Wiley Cc: Steve Coast; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 06:12, John-Michael Wiley mailto:jmwi...@microsoft.com>> wrote: I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers tomorrow. http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ I pasted the new output below. Thanks, J.M. - No related, but I wonder about the "bbox" parameter in the requests. What should it be? The smallest possible bbox completely containing the road to be detected? Is it also a technical optimization parameter, i.e. specifying the world might work but with a huge performance penalty? - Do you think, at one point, it would be possible to detect all roads/segments within the bbox according to one point defining the roads "color" (This would probably increase the usefulness of the system by an order of magnitude...) - Chris - ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
François Van Der Biest wrote: I felt quite frustrated when I saw the silverlight stuff warning, so I decided to create a simple client with OpenLayers. Here it is: http://maps.qualitystreetmap.org/bingtracing/ Thank you - that let me try it ! In a few tests, I saw the tool prefer to route through fields and buildings rather than use the road. So I guess that it still needs some work before it becomes useful. I wonder if different colors of roads and surroundings make a difference in performance. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 06:12, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > > > I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging > servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know > if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers > tomorrow. > > > > http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ > > > > I pasted the new output below. > > > > Thanks, > > J.M. > > - No related, but I wonder about the "bbox" parameter in the requests. What should it be? The smallest possible bbox completely containing the road to be detected? Is it also a technical optimization parameter, i.e. specifying the world might work but with a huge performance penalty? - Do you think, at one point, it would be possible to detect all roads/segments within the bbox according to one point defining the roads "color" (This would probably increase the usefulness of the system by an order of magnitude...) - Chris - ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 21:19:17 +0200 Nic Roets wrote: > For example, when you spider the web and find references to > 5, 20 and 48 Lion Street, Pretoria, then it may help the user who is > mapping that street. Perhaps it's a cul de sac and now he doesn't need > to travel all the way down it to see where the range ends. the real estate sites are excellent for the names of new streets, the number ranges etc. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Maybe put the magicshop version number in the creator? Steve On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:12 PM, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > > > I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging > servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know > if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers > tomorrow. > > > > http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ > > > > I pasted the new output below. > > > > Thanks, > > J.M. > > > > > > maxlon="-122.116432"/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Chris Browet > Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 6:47 PM > To: John-Michael Wiley > Cc: Steve Coast; talk@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with > > > > > > I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing tag > although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to OSM. > In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map for the > user to edit and approve. I generate new id’s for the ones passed back to me > so they don’t conflict with current changes the user has already made. > > > I personally see no advantage for switching to osm change, as all features > are new anyway, but indeed the disadvantage of being too easy to upload > "as-is", without proper review... > > - Chris - > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers tomorrow. http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ I pasted the new output below. Thanks, J.M. From: christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Chris Browet Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 6:47 PM To: John-Michael Wiley Cc: Steve Coast; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing tag although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to OSM. In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map for the user to edit and approve. I generate new id's for the ones passed back to me so they don't conflict with current changes the user has already made. I personally see no advantage for switching to osm change, as all features are new anyway, but indeed the disadvantage of being too easy to upload "as-is", without proper review... - Chris - ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
> I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing tag > although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to OSM. > In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map for the > user to edit and approve. I generate new id’s for the ones passed back to me > so they don’t conflict with current changes the user has already made. > I personally see no advantage for switching to osm change, as all features are new anyway, but indeed the disadvantage of being too easy to upload "as-is", without proper review... - Chris - ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Thanks everyone for the feedback so far we have these issues we will hopefully be fixing and getting propped soon: - generator=CGIMap 0.0.2 will be removed. - way version will be removed - visibility tag will be removed. - user, uid will be removed - highway tag will be removed. Am I missing any changes? I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing tag although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to OSM. In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map for the user to edit and approve. I generate new id's for the ones passed back to me so they don't conflict with current changes the user has already made. Sincerely, J.M. Wiley From: Chris Browet [mailto:c...@semperpax.com] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 6:26 PM To: Steve Coast Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with Small details: in "" (just clicking "Go" on http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/Default.aspx) 1) "false" is misspelled to "flase" 2) Why "false" in the first place? 3) What/who/why is the uid mentioned? 4) same about version (hardcoded to 5?) It will be experimentally enabled in Merkaartor soon. Regards - Chris - On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 18:17, Steve Coast mailto:st...@asklater.com>> wrote: http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 03:25, Chris Browet wrote: > Small details: > > in ""(just > clicking "Go" on > http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/Default.aspx) > > 1) "false" is misspelled to "flase" > 2) Why "false" in the first place? > 3) What/who/why is the uid mentioned? > 4) same about version (hardcoded to 5?) > > It will be experimentally enabled in Merkaartor soon. > > Regards > - Chris - > P.S. cf. 3) looks like the uid is hardcoded, too 5) "" seems superfluous to me, but that could be debated. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Small details: in ""(just clicking "Go" on http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/Default.aspx) 1) "false" is misspelled to "flase" 2) Why "false" in the first place? 3) What/who/why is the uid mentioned? 4) same about version (hardcoded to 5?) It will be experimentally enabled in Merkaartor soon. Regards - Chris - On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 18:17, Steve Coast wrote: > > http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx > > ___ > 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] magical road detector to play with
Thanks for the feedback. Eyal and jm any chance of confidence? Steve On Feb 3, 2011, at 3:10 PM, François Van Der Biest wrote: > Thanks for this new service. > > I felt quite frustrated when I saw the silverlight stuff warning, so I > decided to create a simple client with OpenLayers. > Here it is: http://maps.qualitystreetmap.org/bingtracing/ > > I really like the whole idea, but the service lacks a confidence index > for the returned feature. > I also guess that the algorithm gives several paths and only the one > with the highest score is returned. > Is it possible to get the other paths along with their scores ? > > F. > > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Steve Coast wrote: >> http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx >> >> ___ >> 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] magical road detector to play with
Thanks for this new service. I felt quite frustrated when I saw the silverlight stuff warning, so I decided to create a simple client with OpenLayers. Here it is: http://maps.qualitystreetmap.org/bingtracing/ I really like the whole idea, but the service lacks a confidence index for the returned feature. I also guess that the algorithm gives several paths and only the one with the highest score is returned. Is it possible to get the other paths along with their scores ? F. On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Steve Coast wrote: > http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx > > ___ > 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] magical road detector to play with
That's an interesting idea, I wonder what else lurks on the web, like postcodes for example? Steve On Feb 3, 2011, at 11:19 AM, Nic Roets wrote: > Steve, > > Another thing that Bing can help us with is determining address ranges > of roads. For example, when you spider the web and find references to > 5, 20 and 48 Lion Street, Pretoria, then it may help the user who is > mapping that street. Perhaps it's a cul de sac and now he doesn't need > to travel all the way down it to see where the range ends. > > A little bit of care will be needed to suppress databases that may be > legally protected. But I can't see any problem if you extract 1 > address per website. > > Regards, > Nic > > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Steve Coast wrote: >> http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx >> >> ___ >> 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] magical road detector to play with
Ah, we can continue our discussion elsewhere, preferably over a beverage. If I could drag myself back to the topic, I might wonder aloud if this technology could be used to add buildings for Project of the Month. ;-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Nic Roets wrote: >> "I only infringed a little bit" is still infringing. > > My understanding is that extracting a single fact from a single source > is always legal (in the US, in the UK, everywhere). Unfortunately in our case, the distinction between a single small fact and systematically copying data from one database to another is very thin, and we want to prevent both infringement and the appearance of infringement. > Journalists > extracts small amounts of facts from many individual sources all day > long and rarely get into trouble. But those times when they do get in trouble, it's costly. For this community, costly could hurt the project in a severe way. > If we extract only 1 address per website, the vast majority of those > pages will be home pages and business websites. People who would > approve of what we are doing if it is brought to their attention. So > it's a symbiotic relationship. That's not quite the same as what I read in your original proposal. > And there is a word for people with disapprove of this practice: Copyright > Troll Nic, Richard has a long history with this community of being one of our ambassadors, in every sense of the world. He's a prolific mapper, he's been a very effective community organizer, a project leader, conference organizer, and former Cloudmade Ambassador. Instead of going on the attack, give what he's saying a listen. Even if you don't agree, being openly hostile to someone with such a long history with the project doesn't make your any stronger. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Nic Roets wrote: >> A little bit of care will be needed to suppress databases that may be >> legally protected. But I can't see any problem if you extract 1 >> address per website. > > I can see a problem with that idea. > > "I only infringed a little bit" is still infringing. My understanding is that extracting a single fact from a single source is always legal (in the US, in the UK, everywhere). Journalists extracts small amounts of facts from many individual sources all day long and rarely get into trouble. If we extract only 1 address per website, the vast majority of those pages will be home pages and business websites. People who would approve of what we are doing if it is brought to their attention. So it's a symbiotic relationship. Google's idea of "a little bit of care" is simply to honor robots.txt, spider with an obvious user agent and adherence to a few web standards. And there is a word for people with disapprove of this practice: Copyright Troll. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Nic Roets wrote: > A little bit of care will be needed to suppress databases that may be > legally protected. But I can't see any problem if you extract 1 > address per website. I can see a problem with that idea. "I only infringed a little bit" is still infringing. "I only infringed a little bit, systematically, over a long period of time" is asking for trouble. To detect that a source is "protected" and still choose to infringe sounds like an exquisitely bad idea. Don't use sources without permission. Best regards, Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Steve Coast wrote: > http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx That's really neat. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Steve, Another thing that Bing can help us with is determining address ranges of roads. For example, when you spider the web and find references to 5, 20 and 48 Lion Street, Pretoria, then it may help the user who is mapping that street. Perhaps it's a cul de sac and now he doesn't need to travel all the way down it to see where the range ends. A little bit of care will be needed to suppress databases that may be legally protected. But I can't see any problem if you extract 1 address per website. Regards, Nic On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Steve Coast wrote: > http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx > > ___ > 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] magical road detector to play with
Stefan de Konink wrote: After toying with markov models and viterbi for image tracing maybe we could do the same for _all_ GPX tracks that OpenStreetMap has stored. Or maybe just the not-too-noisy ones... But I guess that tracks that jump too erratically around a mean vector can be filtered out - though that would reject about everything from urban areas. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Steve Coast wrote: http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx Very interesting. I wonder how it relates to the research I had cited at http://www.mail-archive.com/talk@openstreetmap.org/msg25869.html - I'm eager to read about its development. I hope it won't be as flawed as the the partial mapping of a seemingly random subset of the grid that Google has been churning out in remote areas... But even if the result is imperfect, it will be a welcome help to kickstart manual mapping of virgin areas - thank you ! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011, Steve Coast wrote: http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatic ally-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx After toying with markov models and viterbi for image tracing maybe we could do the same for _all_ GPX tracks that OpenStreetMap has stored. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapgenerator The integration of both would allow automatic map generation, where the user only lacks the streetnames. Since streetname recognition was a project in OSM/Summer of Code 2009, this problem is also solved: http://code.google.com/p/signfinder/ Lets not stop with Youtube movies... Stefan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Thursday, 3 February 2011, Steve Coast wrote: > http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx Ooh! Just what I've always wanted. [goes off to play with it] Dermot -- -- Igaühel on siin oma laul ja ma oma ei leiagi üles ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
