Re: [Talk-GB] Office of National Statistics data
Rob Nickerson wrote: On a related note, we now have the support of the Open Data User Group (ODUG), who have issued a paper calling for the release of address data as open data. As you may or may not recall, ODUG reports in to the Cabinet Office and is responsible for identify public sector datasets that should be made openly available. I haven't had a reply to my own request re the NSG and NLPG stuff, but presumably there were a substantial number of requests for the same data! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Problem with missing links on road
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.04697lon=-1.857193zoom=18layers=C has a gap between the Leamington Road and the roundabout. These exist on the other views and I can't see anything wrong. Any thoughts on why they are missing on the cycle and transport map views? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Problem with missing links on road
Philip Barnes wrote: Am not sure why they are tertiary_link, they are just a short section of one-way around a roundabout splitter island. In this case I think they should be changed to tertiary. I must admit I have never understood the highway=..._link. Didn't think of that one. The 'link' stuff does make sense at times but probably not here where the one-way bit is probably enough. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM
Kevin Peat wrote: No. We should be mapping physical objects... There are plenty of non-physical objects mapped in OSM but I don't see the point of adding road schemes to the db before contracts are awarded. The South Devon Link Road near me was in the planning stage for more than 25 years before work started and having proposed routes in OSM for such long periods wouldn't benefit anyone. The problem is the lack of any current overlay facilities. We are looking at an overlay for historic information, and perhaps a similar 'projected' overlay is now about due? Where more than one proposed route is being discussed, it WOULD be nice to be able to see that information in parallel with OSM, but certainly not in the main database. ( Removing past history from the database is still not cut and dry in my book, but if a safe haven is created for that ... ) Personally I think the right time for any 'new' development to appear is when the diggers move in and start work. At that point it becomes useful to see what is going on from existing routes? Anything else is just 'speculation'. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM
David Earl wrote: http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/a11-fiveways-to-thetford-improvement/ Yes indeed, it's true, they have been clearing the trees through the forest alongside the existing road and levelling the ground. It's been closed overnight in sections to do this so I had to go a long way round when I went that way a few weeks ago. It's a pity that the roundabouts are not being bypassed :( Getting traffic up to the Thetford Bypass quicker is just going to increase the queues there? I seem to remember queueing that end every time I want over but it's been a couple of years since I last went. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM
Jason Cunningham wrote: (just noticed my work on the South Devon Link Road and surrounding area has been deleted, then the same info re-added by someone else! I've been cleansed from the history.) This is the more 'irritating' bit here. People spending a substantial amount of time doing work that someone else simply removes! I'll bang on again about secondary databases where the likes of these 'proposals' can be staged prior to their physical appearance, but the more annoying aspect of this moving forward is the simple scrapping of the current on the ground situation which IS perfectly valid information. Taking the A11 developments as an example, all of the current routing is nicely mapped, so displaying '2012' version of the map requires no 'extra' mapping. It would be nice to be able to roll back show the roads development over time, and there are people around who would contribute that material if a mechanism was available to fill in the gaps. It's the current lack of a mechanism to use/display current historic data that needs addressing? A slightly different example of this is looking at historic data in change sets. I'm probably spoilt with some of the comparison tools when looking at differences between versions of a file or changeset. But it would be nice to see a graphical 'diff' between version of object history in OSM ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone famiiar with Hay-on-Wye?
SomeoneElse wrote: I recently deleted a doodle in Hay-on-Wye, but after doing so noticed that to there northwest there seem to be a cycle path and a footpath _very_ close together: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.073537lon=-3.130221zoom=18layers=M I guess that this could be correct, but presumably it's also possible that they're really the same thing. If it is incorrect, is anyone able to patch it up with local knowledge? I can't remember the exact details around there (been many years since I last walked it), but the main cycleway is the old railway track, and there there several footpaths which used to run originally alongside the railway. So probably just a case that your deletion needs rolling back. One of the problems which makes understanding some of the close proximities is the random nature of 'layers' added just to some elements. The steps between the old track bed and the footway passing under it start and end on the same layer? There is nothing to distinguish the vertical relation between the two tracks going north although guesswork would suggest that the footpath may be further down the slope towards the river? There is quite a steep drop from the town to the river. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Highways Leading to Farms and single residential properties in rural areas
Kevin Peat wrote: On 11 Mar 2013 21:27, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com mailto:dudleyibb...@hotmail.com wrote: Is there a correct answer for this or is it a matter of mapping style? I am leaning towards using Highway=Service for these and keeping Highway=Track for tracks that link from fields to farms or roads to fields (i.e. not from roads to farmyards or residential properties... Modern farms are more like industrial estates with access designed for 40t trucks and massive farm machinery so in those cases I favour highway=service for the main farm access road even if it has a central divide like a track might have. Highway=track is better for typical bridleways, green lanes, etc that only a tractor or 4x4 could use. I tend to follow the same rule. As soon as there is a diversity of premises on the way then it tends to get 'service'. A single residence would not normally have it's drive shown, but where it may have public access to walk down, 'track' seems less formal? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Aerial Photographs
Andy Robinson wrote: I'm less worried about scanning and managing the files now as I have sufficient scanning equipment to cover most bases and disk space attached to an OSM sever doesn't appear to be an issue. We would need to come up with tools and methods of turning them into a seamless mosaic but I'm sure given the task there's a workable solution for that too. All thoughts, suggestions and offers welcome. I've still got space in dry storage and I need to run up to Sheffield with the van to drop some kit into my remote hosting site in the next few weeks so can provide a short term storage solution while things are discussed further. But ideally this needs to be stored in a 'library' location? Or do the photographs need to be stored once scanned and indexed? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Taginfo Golf Tags
Dave F. wrote: BTW, are there any renderings that show golf course details like tees, bunkers, greens etc? It's a shame mapnik doesn't. I'm just looking to add a couple of golf course details myself. Can anybody point me to a good example showing details in the UK. The examples shown on the wiki page are not particularly easy to work with, and I like to be able to 'edit' the demo area to see the things that are not displayed. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Taginfo Golf Tags
sk53.osm wrote: I've added the Ladies (Pans) Course at Machrihanish http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?q=machrihanishzoom=16lat=55.42622lon=-5.72159layers=B0F and the 1st 18th of the Championship course. I can't remember where all the tees are, and as for many links courses, fairways are often shared between holes. I've put two out-of-bounds ways on too, but these need refinement (left of 18 on the main course, i.e., the fairway on 9 of the 9-hole course is out-of-bounds, but not vice versa). Other things to note, the beach is in play on the 1st, I've not added other water hazards. I don't put single lines in for holes as these entirely depend on the ability of the golfer. Parkland courses usually have the edges of the holes more obviously distinguished, but then the rough is usually less intimidating. I long ago started but never finished Chilwell Manor http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?q=machrihanishzoom=17lat=52.91646lon=-1.21937layers=B0F. Bob Kerr provided some examples off list http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=56.00343lon=-2.5352zoom=16 is typical and has a lot more detail than is rendered - no bunkers for example. But I don't think we need an outline to each hole as in your example ( both links are the same ) ... I'd prefer to see one of the tee to hole tracks which is a little easier to view, that is if it's rendered ;) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Taginfo Golf Tags
sk53.osm wrote: I noted above why I dont like tee to hole tracks the 1st at Macrihanish is a great example. If you are a scratch golfer you drive over the beach directly at the hole. Good club golfers will drive more the right avoiding the horrors of being down on the beach. Hackers will try and just lay-up anywhere on the fairway towards the 18th green. Which one is right? The other problem is that the line may be very different from championship tees compared with standard tees, and again different for ladies tees. A more pertinent point from an OSM point of view is that it is not an on-the-ground feature or suitable for verification. It does look nice on rendering and those golf maps they show in the newspapers. Totally understand that, which is probably why arbitrary outlines are wrong as well ;) My point about a line from tee area through to hole is that it does give a clean overview of the course at lower res? Some of the examples Bob supplied we difficult to link tee and hole, but both tee and hole are surv3yable points. Once a better means of adding secondary data is available, then showing the PAR calculations for each colour of tee makes sense but is OTT for the base map. I'm not a golfer - but I can see the advantage of hints when new to a course. I've copied to list as I think this is part of the general discussion to get an approved tagging page. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mass edits of landuse /natural tags
John Baker wrote: The wiki is a consensus of opinion over the years about how to tag things. The lack of respect for this I find staggering. It would be nice if there WAS a consensus. There are a number of 'contradictions' and the area of landuse vs natural has been debated many times and I don't think any of the current 'selections' accurately describe the situation so there is still room for improvement. The general consensus seems to be that 'landuse' is used where an area is managed or has been artificially created and natural where there is no discernible management. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dgrassland highlights some of the subtle differences, and there is a valid argument for natural=meadow co existing with landuse=meadow since there are still some remaining natural meadowlands, or should that be natural=grassland/grassland=meadow ? I don't see the need for the 'grasslands' here at all - just use meadow,veld,pampas or what ever with natural. 'wood' is another area where there are managed and unmanaged woodland which is not forest. landcover was I think proposed at one time to remove the distinction between managed and unmanaged but in reality the distinction IS important even if it's use is not being applied properly. So what checks are you making that there is not such a distinction between the areas that you arbitrarily changing? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mass edits of landuse /natural tags
John Baker wrote: If the original editor applied the tags on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dmeadow http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%253Dmeadow there is no issue. There it defines the state of the managed or unmanaged. And that is the pain the the backside since all these EXTRA tags are unnecessary if the base standard is followed properly. I should not have to look at secondary tags to find that an area is not actually 'landuse', but rather 'natural'. You should be able to identify managed and unmanaged areas from the main tag! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic=rail
Richard Fairhurst wrote: Taginfo/Taginfo GB suggest that railway:historic=rail is not used much elsewhere in the world, and that railway=abandoned, =disused and =dismantled remain the popular choices. No client software appears to take any notice of railway:historic=rail. Would there be any opposition to gradually reverting uses of this tag to railway=dismantled/abandoned, depending on what's on the ground? The only documentation I could find (on a wiki discussion page, of all the obscure places): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Railways#railway:historic.3Dxxx_or_former:railway.3Dxxx_in_place_of_railway.3Dabandoned.2Fdismantled.3F There is a special case, but I'm not sure that is what you are actually seeing. While the track bed may have been lifted, a number of 'historic' lines still have statutory orders in place designating them as 'protected'. For instance the line up from Broadway extending the GWR track from Toddington has to be treated as if it is active and the Broadway Bypass had to have a bridge built to allow for an electrified line to be run through. BR is unlikely ever to do that and the information is not visible on the ground, but it is available information. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic=rail
sk53.osm wrote: I don't think Richard's original post was an invitation to discuss arcane quirks of Britain's historical railway system. I have raised the issue of wholesale tag changing several times recently, and as this tagging is clearly not with the consensus of mappers either in the UK or elsewhere, I would suggest it be reverted. Casual changing of tags can create a lot of work for people. That is one of the reasons why it needs to be discussed. In this case the different tag could have been added rather than obliterate a widely used tag convention. I would support a reversion of these edits, and ask the contributor to consult with this list first. Screwing the ordering of the thread up totally ... My point to Richard was that there MAY be a valid use for a different tag. Richard was asking if he could change it, but part of the reason for local tagging differences IS because of arcane quirks ... That is not to say that this tags is right ... there is room to clean up a number of the railway related tags ... just that it may be flagging a difference that 'abandoned' looses. Given the amount of work now being done on additional railway information on the map, proper expansion of the fine detail is important. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net mailto:rich...@systemed.net wrote: I've just been bitten by the minority, largely undocumented usage of railway:historic=rail on a bunch of dismantled/abandoned railways in Britain. Having exported some OSM data and done a few days' manual processing on it, I belatedly find that various lines are missing due to not taking account of this tag and I'm going to have to do a whole bunch more work. :( Taginfo/Taginfo GB suggest that railway:historic=rail is not used much elsewhere in the world, and that railway=abandoned, =disused and =dismantled remain the popular choices. No client software appears to take any notice of railway:historic=rail. Would there be any opposition to gradually reverting uses of this tag to railway=dismantled/abandoned, depending on what's on the ground? The only documentation I could find (on a wiki discussion page, of all the obscure places): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/__wiki/Talk:Railways#railway:__historic.3Dxxx_or_former:__railway.3Dxxx_in_place_of___railway.3Dabandoned.__2Fdismantled.3F http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Railways#railway:historic.3Dxxx_or_former:railway.3Dxxx_in_place_of_railway.3Dabandoned.2Fdismantled.3F -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ongoing routing developments
Andrew M. Bishop wrote: lscesles...@lsces.co.uk writes: Disclaimer: I wrote Routino, so I might be slightly biased. Andrew Added that to my list, but I find it a little cumbersome with respect to the other options. Having now got osrm working on my own server, the way that you can drag the route around is very nice. That said, my main 'problem' with the current routing engines is their novel way of identifying one's motion at a change of route such as at a roundabout. What prompted me to dig deeper was being in the wrong lane on the M25 because of these 'mistakes':( Oh and making this work well on a tablet/smartphone. Your website is a bit heavy for that target. Your feedback is useful, even if slightly negative. When you say cumbersome I guess that you a referring to the web interface rather than the command line version? I have always considered the web interface as a secondary part of Routino. It is however a necessary feature for allowing the primary feature - the routing software - to be displayed. Unfortunately when I wrote the web interface the only choice was OpenLayers but it seems that most maps these days are using Leaflet. If you have any more feedback, particularly about the quality of the routing instructions, I would be interested to hear it (off-list if you prefer). My problem Andrew is 'testing' routing instructions. Locus on the Android machines has four options, and using them out on the road I'm starting to build up a 'wish list' to get something that works SAFELY. If Routino was an option then I could test that as well, but I'm limited to off-line testing via the web interface. The main problem I am finding even with OSRM is the fact that none of these are usable when traveling down motorways and main trunk roads. I had thought OSRM was doing a better job, but I've had a run through a route that I've never used before, and 'straight' at every stage of moving from the M6 onto the M42 South is a real problem when you should be using the inside and then outside lanes through the intersection. FORTUNATELY I'm still running the tomtom which correctly reports the lane to be using. Next step on my part is to see if I can get Locus to select a private OSRM server in place of the default one. I have my local server working and I can get at some of the elements, but need to be able to use it live. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts
Adam Hoyle wrote: This would be awesome information to have in OSM, but as it is historic information, sometimes with no obvious above ground visualisation, is it definitely appropriate for the project? (Personally I hope it is, but wanted to see what the consensus is). OHM has been set up exactly to support this type of data ;) But it looks a little empty at presnet :( http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/ -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts
Adam Hoyle wrote: On 8 Jul 2013, at 11:31, Lester Caineles...@lsces.co.uk wrote: Adam Hoyle wrote: This would be awesome information to have in OSM, but as it is historic information, sometimes with no obvious above ground visualisation, is it definitely appropriate for the project? (Personally I hope it is, but wanted to see what the consensus is). OHM has been set up exactly to support this type of data;) But it looks a little empty at presnet:( http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/ Wow, I didn't realise such a thing existed - looks potentially rather awesome, although I agree it is slightly empty right now. What's the background / roadmap / plan with it? Is it 'owned' by OSM, or an offshoot? http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic is the discussion list, and it's a work in progress ... needs a bit more support to get the rules laid down and one of the things still to be resolved is how to link between current data which may have 'start_date' relevant to a search, and data which has expired from the current map ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] First pass at cross reference to UK tile sources.
The list of available historic maps UK we can use directly as backgrounds to OSM data is growing nicely. I've tabulated ones I've had a play with on http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Tile+Server+Sources and a number of them can be selected as backgrounds on http://myhomecloud.co.uk:8080/osrm/ The myhomecloud site will be tidied up and much of this will be hosted there, but currently the index of data is at http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Mapping+Index Now that there are a number of alternative UK sources I'll switch the mapserver page back to it's original map set covering the Isle of Man on it's own. The old maps need a little tweek to align them better with OSM, and then these views can be added to the timeline. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Help with postgres
I've been working through all the disjointed installation guides in order to set up mapnik to run my own server, but while I'm fairly happy that everything is now in place, generate_tiles.py is giving me an authentication error. I had some fun at various points, and I'm installing onto an SUSE12.3 server which is running text only, so I'm using ssh access to give me the command line, which may be part of my problem since I'm logged in as 'root'. I seem to have a 'gis' database fully populated, and I can access it via the user 'root', but not via the user 'gisuser' which is what I thought should be used, and which has worked in all the previous steps running osm2pgsql. Can anybody kick me in the right direction to fix this? I've got osrm routing running on the machine so something has set up properly. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with postgres
Keith Sharp wrote: When I did this, many years ago, I used something like: createuser -S -D -R apache echo GRANT ALL ON SCHEMA PUBLIC TO apache; | psql gis echo grant all on geometry_columns to apache; | psql gis echo grant all on spatial_ref_sys to apache; | psql gis I'm using apache as the user ID here as that's what Mapnik was running as. This is taken from: http://www.passback.org.uk/maps/fedora.shtml. Not helping :( I used http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/PostGIS/Installation#openSUSE_11.2 to set up, and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik#Authentication_failure kicked in, but 'psql gis' gets me in and I can play with the data, just generate_tiles.py is giving the FATAL: Ident authentication failed for user root error On 10 Jul 2013, at 08:43, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: I've been working through all the disjointed installation guides in order to set up mapnik to run my own server, but while I'm fairly happy that everything is now in place, generate_tiles.py is giving me an authentication error. I had some fun at various points, and I'm installing onto an SUSE12.3 server which is running text only, so I'm using ssh access to give me the command line, which may be part of my problem since I'm logged in as 'root'. I seem to have a 'gis' database fully populated, and I can access it via the user 'root', but not via the user 'gisuser' which is what I thought should be used, and which has worked in all the previous steps running osm2pgsql. Can anybody kick me in the right direction to fix this? I've got osrm routing running on the machine so something has set up properly. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with postgres
Lester Caine wrote: Not helping :( Panic over! Just needed to re-read the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik#Authentication_failure note ... I'd missed that the xml file was generated without a -user setting ;) Up to level 9 already ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with postgres
Tom Hughes wrote: On 10/07/13 09:24, Lester Caine wrote: Not helping :( I used http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/PostGIS/Installation#openSUSE_11.2 to set up, and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik#Authentication_failure kicked in, but 'psql gis' gets me in and I can play with the data, just generate_tiles.py is giving the FATAL: Ident authentication failed for user root error Well why are you running renderd as root! You really, really don't want to be doing that... Habit ... I'm remote onto the machine via ssh as root because I was configuring the server and that is the way I've done things for many years ... May not be politically correct these days, but I can set up the various accounts quickly and I've not got used to having to 'sudo' every command :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] bbox coordinates
Anybody got an 'optimal' bbox setting for the UK and Ireland including the Scottish Isles. I'm running (-14.5, 49, 3, 61) but I'm sure that the -14.5 is overkill? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historic Maps - Can you help?
Steven Horner wrote: I've used the NLS maps a lot and wish there were more maps from England available. Obviously this isn't a priority for them but would happily help in anyway I can. I have looked at their online georeferencer but almost all are done. It's a shame the English equivelant aren't as open. What is available covering England is not too bad. A number of the sets I have are already available as backgrounds and a few just as scanned sheets. The reason for creating the list was to work out just what does still need scanning. I'd like to be able to run through all issues of the bartholomew half inch series but even the ones already available are a start. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historic Maps - Can you help?
Rob Nickerson wrote: I'd like to be able to run through all issues of the Bartholomew half inch series but even the ones already available are a start. Lester, Are you aware that Bartholomew half inch maps for Scotland, England and Wales are available online at http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/ ? If yes, then can you please explain to me (in simple terms :-) ) exactly what you would like. Is it that you would like to see the issues from other years so that you can see how things have evolved on the ground? NLS has a couple of editions, but there are several editions and yes I'm looking to the evolution of areas over time. http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Bartholomew+Cloth Thanks, Rob p.s. We should be able to get this view added to JOSM and other editors with ease if it is not already there. Yes I've been using a number of historic layers already. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Banquetting Halls (neither hotels, not community centres)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: Banqueting hall seems rather specific. These types of places may be used for a wide variety of events, so may be known by different names. eg might be used for conferences, exhibition, live music etc. I think a more generic tag for an event hall would be useful. That's probably better than banqueting hall. On the other hand, it needs to be distinguished from the concept exposition centre which is listed as something that a conference centre is not. Conference centre was suggested off list, but I think that is different: much more strongly B2B, large groups talking together, rather than lots of small conversations, little connotation of food and even less of music and dance. This is where there needs perhaps to be a better concept of two level tags? The building has a hall or halls. And that encompasses village halls through to the likes of the NEC. What the halls are used for is almost secondary, and perhaps a check list of functions? If a hall is licensed to carry out weddings then that is an additional flag rather than trying to find a single name for these type of building? But this is where the secondary data should perhaps also be a separate database? With everybody trying to get in on the specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of themed entertainment? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: Incidentally, one common usage I do agree with, and which Ofcom seem to use, is the space after the director exchange, as 79460676 is a bit long to remember as one group, and there is a historical, and some geographic, significance, in this split. http://www.area-codes.org.uk/formatting.php Personally I still think of 0207 as Inner London and 0208 as Outer London, but moving the 7/8 as part of the exchange sort of makes sense these days. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: In particular, in London, you can dial this number as 00442079460676, 02079460676 or 79460676. On the other hand, dialing it as 9460676 will fail. I'd forgotten that particular reason for grouping the extra 7/8 differently! Been 25 years since I moved out from London :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Banquetting Halls (neither hotels, not community centres)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of themed entertainment? Whilst banqueting hall is used in the PR material for the place in question, what is actually on sale is the use of the building and some very basic services. The patrons are expected to source food and entertainment from third party contractors. This is where the current tag setup is something of a mess. There are gaps in the 'building' tag which get building=yes and some other tag ( 7000+ building=no is interesting ;) ) but with some 4600 different tags for 'building' simply adding banqueting_hall is probably perfectly valid as well. Probably the right way to tag these type of operations is ... landuse=commercial building=commercial amenity=hall - which is not listed under amenity, but is used website=xxx - which will give the details (if we could access them from the map) But it's all so inconsistent with other buildings? There is amenity=banquet_hall used but personally I'd expect that to be something more like a tourist attraction 'medieval banquet' venue running mainly themed events? Something like http://www.lumleycastle.com/elizabethan-banquets/ but that is not detailed currently ;) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=146749#map=17/54.85361/-1.55454 - actually that need s alot of tidying up to add missing detail. The bottom line is do we add the fine detail? ... places like Lumley are a hotel, restaurant, banqueting hall, and so on, so should there be tags for each? If a hotel does not accept non-residents in it's restaurant then it's not tagged ... it's function room may be tagged as 'licensed for weddings' or just receptions ... where do you stop :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Banquetting Halls (neither hotels, not community centres)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: website=xxx - which will give the details (if we could access them from the map) If you access it fromhttp://www.openlinkmap.org/ you can access them from the map (and also phone numbers). How long have I been using OSM and I've not found out about this ... But I tried to drop in to edit a few urls that had gone missing, and P2 is not currently loading for me. It was fine yesterday and id is working if I select it but it just does not work for me when trying to tidy data by adding and moving ways. On the satellite imagery I can't see the cursor much of the time that an element is selected to move! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: Whilst most London people don't realise that they can abbreviated numbers, I believe it is still common to miss the area code, once you get outside a director area (although that might just be a generational thing, with older users less likely to be using mobile phones). Well it is still perfectly acceptable to say 'Evesham 842908' and locals know just to ring the number. This was one of the reasons the inner/outer split of London was so unpopular initially. But you need to be able to look up the exchange code and I can remember being given a phone number after having an accident on the M4. I don't remember the exact name, but something like 'Forest Hill 1234' and 4 digit numbers were acceptable back then, except 'Forest Hill' was a local sub exchange that was not listed and even directory enquiries did not recognise it! 'Reading 123456' obviously did not have as posh a ring, but I of cause though it has a duff number and the Police became involved. SO lets stick to numbers ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Building in space
I have a multi-story car park which I need to add a 'shopmobility' hire store on the top level and correctly link to the footpaths and roads so that routing works for disabled users. The only road access is on the base level, and disabled bays are on the top level next to the shop. Footpaths all come of the top level and the road access slopes steeply away from the car park. Just to add to the fun, there is a car valeting business 3 stories below, as well which is also not mapped currently. I'm not seeing anything in the wiki as a guide to handle this. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions
Tom Chance wrote: I've seen two new users accidentally delete residential landuse areas near me in the past fortnight: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17695130 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17505646 Could this be a problem with the iD editor? Has anyone else noticed it? A known bug it iD is that it selects the relation if nothing else is found, so you can easily highlight something without actually seeing it. They would have to delete as well, but if they had something selected and hovered over the delete it is all to easy to remove something without knowing! This was a reason we objected to iD being made default - it's not ready yet :( -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] bing image alignment
I'm currently playing in an area where the highest resolution imagery is still an older view, while as I zoom out we step to newer imagery which is some distance off from the map tracks. I'm fairly happy with the map as I have had some older gps tracks which it follows, and I'll run over in the morning and gather a new track as a cross reference, but are people in general finding that these new images are out of alignment with what is currently mapped? Can I assume that they need realigning before using them? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions
Shaun McDonald wrote: Were the landuse areas attached to roads? It’s rather easy in iD to click the middle of an area and select the area. It's the way it works ... if you click and there is nothing close, then it picks up an area which may well be outside the area you are looking at ... It would be MUCH safer if you had to pick the boundary to select it! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions
Ed Loach wrote: It would be MUCH safer if you had to pick the boundary to select it! But much harder to use for areas that share the boundary ways with an adjacent area. You'd have to resort to the / stuff that Potlatch uses or middle-click for JOSM (or whatever). I think all I am asking for is that it only selects an area if the boundary is actually visible. But I'm used to 3D drawing packages which provide a select list when there are several entities within range. This warns when the wrong one is selected and allows selection of the right one. The problem is where several areas overlap, and you don't know that they are. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Search for location
I'm buried in other code at the moment so don't have time to dig for an answer, so can someone point me in the right direction to get a 'search result' via the API for looking up a location. I know I can go via the website, but I need to be able to search for http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/515065315 but using the 'McMurdo Station' name. I am expecting that I'll get several results at times, so the node/way number will be used eventually, but initial search to give a list to select from would be helpful. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hand-drawn OS maps on Wikimedia Commons
Rob Nickerson wrote: p.s. Is there a Linux equivalent of MAPC2MAPC? qgis2 ? I still need to actually get it to create an alignment, but it displays the material I do have nicely, so is anybody using this for doing the referencing? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NPE data
Barnett, Phillip wrote: NPE maps were the first backgrounds for the editors other than some quite low res Yahoo imagery of the UK, so people used them for mapping streams/rivers/woods etc back in the day. As you have noticed, they don’t necessarily relate to modern streams – they may have dried up or been culverted/piped long since. They are all over 50 years old, (for copyright reasons) after all. Yes, if the facts on the ground have changed, then the stream needs to be moved, or removed. No process needed, just use an editor. Note – only remove NPE tagged items if you know they have changed – don’t just do a mass-remove! (That’s in the unlikely event you were planning to write a bot to remove them all!) Of cause it would be nice if people could actually tag when a feature ceased to exist using the end_date tag. This is all important material for the OHM view of history. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Editor backbground layers in iD
Paul Norman wrote: Paul Norman wrote: It's worth pointing out that iD doesn't actually have an imagery list. It inherits its from the editor-imagery-index project at http://osmlab.github.io/editor-imagery-index/, which is for OpenStreetMap editing, not historical mapping or a general list of all possible imagery. Thanks Paul - that's something that I hadn't realised. From the comments above, presumably the open historical map people are using the same list rather than one tailored to historical mapping though? They shouldn't be. The editor-imagery-index project is targeted at the needs of OpenStreetMap, not of other projects. With how the index is setup with each layer being its own file it is trivial to automatically copy in additional files before running make. In fact, there are layers in editor-imagery-index which can't be used outside of OSM. Well since OHM is simply a part of OSM created to placate the complaints of a few, it IS part of OSM ... but making background layers locally selectable is a facility that many of us would benefit from. More and more material is becoming available which while not relevent to a 'current' map is essential in completing the historic development of the maps. In 50 years time the current view of the map will be 'historic' and we need to design for that fact today rather than simply hiding the data in the change logs :( -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Moderation (WAS: Primary or Trunk? PITA?)
Tom Hughes wrote: Lessons: * We should be able to explain the reasoning behind our tagging if asked. Absolutely, and I believe I did so. Tom - reading Rob's post I don't think he was directing anything at you, however like him, I was concerned about other posts in the thread! But what is more irritating is the continual cross posting as I can't see the other posts that are being refered to, and I suspect you have not seen some either? PLEASE post to one list only should be what moderation is asking ... I don't bother with the tagging list so can't post back to that ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Oliver Jowett wrote: The point is that just using the map is not our target audience. As has been said many times, we are not trying to be an end user mapping site that offers a Google Maps alternative for the masses. Our target audience is people that want to signup and contribute. I contribute when I see problems with the map in areas I am familiar with. To see the problems, I have to be using the map in the first place. To use the map I'd prefer not to have that signup box floating around all the time (I am only logged in when I am about to edit). I'd second that ( although this should probably be on the main talk list ) I CONTRIBUTE to mapping to provide correct information to my client base and I encourage them to use OSM instead of Google because we do provide the correct details, and in many cases the only detail in an area. We need a clean user interface which has easy access to edit functions, although I'm tending towards off-line editing as certainly I would NOT recommend iD even to new users, so josm currently seems the only option anyway going forward! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Jonathan wrote: Personally speaking I don't feel it would be a terrible idea to ditch the OpenStreetMap.org map and just have this page as the homepage: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_OpenStreetMap I don't believe OSM is about rendering maps, isn't it about creating a cartographic database? There is basically no reason that we can't simply have http://wiki.openstreetmap.org giving direct access to the documentation and http://map.openstreetmap.org giving clean access to the same map layers that the editor provides as a background. Then leave http://openstreetmap.org to proide what ever people want from that view ... Yes other versions of the map exist and can be used, but this is the definative map, and changes made here are reflected promptly while some other maps can be weeks behind ... I can post changes and see them rendered fairly promptly. But as yet there is no tidy method of reflecting those changes into my own rendering ... which is another problem here. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ashamed to be a part of the OSM GB community
Richard Fairhurst wrote: Thirdly; there is no they, only we. OSM, all of it, map and code equally, is made by its contributors. So when Brian says Surely we can do better than this?: Yes. We can. But only if you're prepared to be part of the we. The main problem with that statement is that not all of us time time to learn yet another environment and method of working. I'm on github, mirroring to HG locally for compatibility with other projects, but I simply don't have time to dig into Ruby. Python and Java is bad enough to fix problems with my development tools which to some extent I'm driven to use to provide a good PHP development platform. I wasted many days playing with bits which were working at one time, but changes in other areas has broken them again. Unfortunately the playing field is not flat, so we have to live with what others 'provide' with little acceptance of other usages of the data. I'll repeat what I've said on the main talk list ... the new front end is TOO targeted at pushing visitors to become mappers. I don't actually have a problem with that ... however the follow up pages lack a LOT of sensible information for NEW mappers and that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. The 'About' page is simply NOT 'Learn More' but is exactly 'About OSM', so some other path needs to be provided to help even for the tools ON the new front end. I'm trying to work out what 'Export' is intended to do, and some help on how things like the 'Share' now works would be nice ( my notes still relate to the OLD tools! ). HELP should be available on actually using the map as it is configured now ... But what I'm looking to providing is a decent 'Large View' which has promotional material and other links on the ONE page. If you come to the site from an embeded map it IS a case of 'what the f**k' ... I've had a second call about this already this weekend and I'm expecting many more tomorrow when users get back to work although it will probably over the next weeks as people come accross it :( THAT is why a proper announcement ON THE SITE ITSELF that it was going to change would have been helpful ... just like when the style change was dropped on us with little notification! Does no one learn? If I've got to create my own independent site to do this then OK. I did have OSRM running, but keeping our own mirrors up to date is simply NOT supported well currently !!! No way can I support a whole world map, I need something that mirrors the UK area in something less than the 2 or 3 week cycle of some mirrors :( -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Matthijs Melissen wrote: The website changes have been announced on the talk mailing list before it went live: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-November/068555.html 'Nearly ready to roll' is not 'will go live on'! Had I had a little more notice I would have grabbed an html dump of the old site ... Can you provide a link to the ANNOUNCEMENT that the new version was going live? (And yes, before it went live, many people suggested to remove the Welcome box as well.) And the response was 'we will not change it!' so why ask for comments when the changes were already a done deal? MOST other projects maintain the older style of site in parallel with such a major overhaul. At least then we could access the older version if there WAS a problem and there is no real overhead to adding a link to the older code. If the change was made without maintaining a version of the old site in parallel then we need to change the management process! Some projects/services have even rolled back changes where they prove unpopular, or simply failed, so NOT providing a legacy link seems dictatorial? At least we can still access potlatch in place of Id so the principle has already been adopted here. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Richard Fairhurst wrote: not you, Lester, I don't think the blog COULD withstand the RANDOM capitals EVERYWHERE I make no apologies for the style of messaging. I've been doing it for over 15 years and I'm just happy with emphasis where it is shouting out in my head. It's a bit like those people who insist in top posting on lists were the written rule is not to :) If I was not wasting so much time fixing sites broken by other peoples actions then I would have probably managed to get my own services running by now, but every time I go back to that code I'm having to start again as something has changed :( -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Ed Loach wrote: When I first edited with Potlatch 2 after the change it took me a moment to spot that I had to click the work OpenStreetMap rather than View to get back to the map view. Just hit that one myself ... and it dropped straight to the map, but I'm sure that I used to get a warning that I was leaving the potlatch screen? OK - It has done it this time, must not have touched anything last time so not had 'save' active. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Nick Whitelegg wrote: I make no apologies for the style of messaging. I've been doing it for over 15 years and I'm just happy with emphasis where it is shouting out in my head. It's a bit like those people who insist in top posting on lists were the written rule is not to :) As an aside it doesn't help that many mail clients, particularly proprietary ones, insist on assuming that top posting is the way to go. If you're in a rush it can be a PITA to manually do standard Unix-style quote-posting, or to fiddle around in the options trying to see if you can set them up to do it. If mail clients followed the standards less people would top post! ;-) Very true ... My old N900 phone worked nicely email wise, the android replacement and the tablet has an apology as the sig :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Andy Robinson wrote: But how do I get the box back now that I’ve closed it ;-) I know you are asking for a button ;) But wiping the cookies for the site resets everything and should be an available option to comply with the cookie directive anyway? Since the servers are UK based, shouldn't that directive by observed with the correct warning? *From:*Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 02 December 2013 15:26 *To:* Talk GB *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website Thank you to whoever it was who listened to this thread and implemented a close function. It's much appreciated -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hobbyist OSM Data Server?
Nick Whitelegg wrote: What sort of spec machine are we taking about for a GB extract? The main problem is less the osm2pgsql extraction (which can be run in slim mode to conserve memory) and more the speed of accessing the postgis database to grab the data. Very much 'work in progress' ... a new initial extract is running as we speak :) http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/OSM+Data+Mirror+on+SUSE13.1 I have OSRM running on that machine http://osrm.rdm2.co.uk/main.html and am planning to drop another machine over to Sheffield to do the rendering for my own tile set, but I've had this all running nicely on a local machine, only restricted by 'BT Broadband' so once it's all on a nice fast pipe everything should be a bit more accessible. While the crib sheets are freely accessible, they are mainly intended as my own guide to keeping everything running, and rebuilding machines if required. Any corrections or improvements are MOST welcome! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Question regarding OS Opendata
John Aldridge wrote: I have a question regarding the OS Opendata. How accurately aligned is it? I've noticed that in some places the bing orphophotos match up almost perfectly to the buildings below, and it other areas there can be some difference (sometimes up to a meter of). I don't know how accurate OS Opendata is, but I do know that Bing is sometimes several metres off (and sometimes differently off depending on how far you are zoomed in). I've had carefully surveyed data buggered up a few times by people 'correcting' it to match the Bing photography! It's often interesting when imagery is updated. Zooming in and seeing old and new versions at different zoom levels. Often these simply don't line up well with one another. I've even resorted now to popping out and taking GPS readings in the hope of establishing a better reference, which with an external aerial should be accurate to 1mt. The result is that with the large vertical variations around here one can see the effect of a satellite not being directly over head quite clearly and different passes give different offsets to landmarks. One can see the different side walls much of the time. I don't find the OS Opendata any more accurate. If anything it tends to be a little 'artistic' ignoring a lot of fine detail so I have no problem moving objects where originally sourced from Opendata. That is once the new data is proven to be more accurate. Altitude *IS* an important element of determining accuracy and is something we need to take more seriously ... the flat earth society has been proven wrong long ago :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices
John Aldridge wrote: Is there a consensus on how to tag Royal Mail Parcel Force delivery offices? Are these amenity=post_office, or something else? Presumably Parcelforce offices are distinguished by being tagged operator=Parcelforce? Apologies if I've missed something in the documentation or help -- I did look! http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228404442 Search on 'parcelforce' lists a few depots but these all need tidying in some way. amenity=post_office should be added if they actually take parcels in, but I'm not sure that is correct for all carrier depots? I use City Link but they are not really a post office? http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/471456976 is another example of confusion, since the building above was not listed in the search results, but http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41363497 has amenity=post_depot ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices
Borbus wrote: Is there a consensus on how to tag Royal Mail Parcel Force delivery offices? Are these amenity=post_office, or something else? If there is a facility that allows the general public access to collect or send mail then I'd consider amenity=post_office to be appropriate. They're not Post Offices, though. Post Office (capitalised) has a very specific meaning in the UK, with more services than just posting letters. It depends what we want amenity=post_office to mean but I'd say at a minimum without further tags it should mean you can actually post something. If someone goes to a Local Delivery Office with a parcel to post they will be in for a surprise. Added to that, there are a growing network of parcel services based on convenience stores. I've been making more use of that service for parcels which Royal Mail has now priced too high ;) Even in the local 'post office', some activities are cheaper at the shop counter rather than at the post counter. Post Office is perhaps now just part of the name like 'Parcelforce Depot' or 'Sorting Office'? To also bring in is these 'collection point' services for parcels. amenity=parcel_drop and parcel_collect perhaps along with operator= and perhaps url to the related service? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Warwickshire County Council releases aerial imagery
Richard Symonds wrote: Hi Brian! This looks fantastic and will be really useful for Wikipedia too (Aerial views of significant buildings etc). However, the link you've provided obviously only works for mapping. Is there a regular HTML-based 'homepage' the describes the aerial imagery collection etc, that you know of? http://maps.warwickshire.gov.uk/historical/ -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Warwickshire County Council releases aerial imagery
Jason Woollacott wrote: All Copyright info seems to be recorded on this page http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/historicalmapsterms And the only reference to Aerial Photography is copyrighted to © Get Mapping 2000 / © GeoPerspectives 2006. I've found a reference to OGL under http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/disclaimer Which releases non restricted info under this license Interestingly there is no mention of OSM in the terms despite the fact that it is one of the base layers used. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices
John Aldridge wrote: On 17/01/2014 18:18, John Aldridge wrote: here's a second draft proposal... OK, there doesn't seem to be enough interest/consensus to justify taking this any further, so I'm going to drop it :( I think that generally it will get adopted anyway as it does make sense. The problem here is country specific things don't get much traction, however I think that this is generally appropriate world wide? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] POI features: node vs way?
Nick Whitelegg wrote: seeing as I've always tagged POIs as point features, though, it's not been something I've had to deal with until now when I've noticed a few point features converted to areas. Sorry, mapped POIs as point features I meant. Anyway, I guess the best way to do it is via the scripting capabilities of osm2pgsql? The discussion earlier on related to 'micromapping' where a lot of existing content is only present as nodes, but people are now going back and adding in the relevant buildings. It would perhaps now be worth going back to discuss an extension to the API which provides a 'macro' view in addition to also returning the fine detail. The possible problem with that is that it may actually be better to provide a node manually at an appropriate location rather than trying to guess one from the fine detail? Some material only requires a node value and that should be the master POI set of tagging, while the additional fine detail forms a secondary layer of information. Only one entity but with a macro and micro view. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] BIS report on open national address data
Dan S wrote: Nice to see the recommendation. I guess from an OSM point of view, one of the most important responses to make would be to ensure that the basic free product is truly OGL, free of any more restricted content (e.g. OSOGL) that could hold back beneficial uses of the data? Not read in detail, but 'page 83' sums it up for me ... all of the work relating to an address is done by the local council who input it to the LLPG and from there it is archived to the NLPG. The only involvement that Royal Mail have is in creating a new postcode if one does not already exist. Certainly OS have no input creating the raw data, only in later displaying the information provided by the plans created as part of the planning process. Cost of a planning application covers the bulk of the expence? and a postcode is simply a tag the bulk of which is defined by the adjacent existing postcodes. As long as we can in future add the NLPG location reference ... which includes locations that do not physically have postal deliveries! ... then what information that is available via the NLPG can then simply be accessed? Nothing really needed otherwise except OSM could provide the fine detail of an NLPG reference where that is not currently even recorded in the LLPG ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Selection of zoom area.
I'm in the process of moving a site from using google to OSM, but I'm looking at doing something a little different to my normal setups. http://espc.lsces.org.uk/wiki/Coverage+Area is as far as I have got, and the left hand links drop over to OSM, but obviously I'd like to get the right hand map updating. Can anybody suggest an example I can crib to get it working? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK postcodes on each side of the road
On 18/05/14 15:33, Tom Hughes wrote: It's quite normal, yes. My street has three postcodes. One covers both sides for about one third of the length and the other two each cover one side for the other two thirds. Postcodes are part of an address and belong to a building, not a street, so that is where they should be tagged. Since the postcode is designed to assist with nothing more than postal sorting, some of these facits are to be expected. The postman will walk down one side, turn around at the end and walk down the other side, so the three ( or more ) postcodes will be in order of the walk :) Postcodes belong to the walk, so are essentially sections of a street normally, in addition to being tagged by delivery points in PAF ... Postal Address File. House identifier + postcode is all that is needed to provide a full address, and in this case, the street and other location data can be provided by tags on a street rather than duplicating that data unnecessarily on every building ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK postcodes on each side of the road
On 19/05/14 08:06, Marc Gemis wrote: and in this case, the street and other location data can be provided by tags on a street rather than duplicating that data unnecessarily on every building ... Surely that’s what associatedStreet relations are for. Does Nominatim already supports associatedStreet relations to pick up the postcode ? When I tried it 8 months ago, it just used it to find a street segment (the first one in the relation). It then took the name of that street segment as the street name for the address. associatedStreet is just another unnecessary layer in the way it is currently defined. I see little point having the house identifier duplicated. Where a postcode uniquely defines a set of higher level relations then that is all we need. Where a postcode is not available, then a link to a street way has a place, but in many cases creating complex relations just makes the problem worse. Personally I would prefer to see editors providing adjacent objects as options for populating some of the tag elements, so if a postcode is identified it can be duplicated. Nominatim does work nicely without the need for the added complication so I'd suggest at least in the UK we do not use 'associatedStreet' at all. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK postcodes on each side of the road
On 19/05/14 08:57, Marc Gemis wrote: from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/FAQ quote Why doesn't Nominatim process addr:* tags on buildings[edit] For performance reasons buildings (and other low level features) are not fully indexed, but are instead simply inherit from their parent street. As such many addr:* tags except those directly related to the building are ignored. For instance add:town will never be used - instead the town of the road will be used. /quote This is why I ask whether it works for you to have postcodes on the address nodes. My experiences is that they are useless for Nominatim. I've been slowly adding details such as businesses in the local trading estates, and just adding postcode + building ID for each. Nominatim always picks up the correct location data even when a building is adjacent to a number of roads. But nominatim is not the only tool using address data, and not having to find adjacent roads because the postcode is available makes life easy. I have a complete postcode database which does of course help as well ;) On 19/05/14 08:06, Marc Gemis wrote: and in this case, the street and other location data can be provided by tags on a street rather than duplicating that data unnecessarily on every building ... Surely that’s what associatedStreet relations are for. Does Nominatim already supports associatedStreet relations to pick up the postcode ? When I tried it 8 months ago, it just used it to find a street segment (the first one in the relation). It then took the name of that street segment as the street name for the address. associatedStreet is just another unnecessary layer in the way it is currently defined. I see little point having the house identifier duplicated. Where a postcode uniquely defines a set of higher level relations then that is all we need. Where a postcode is not available, then a link to a street way has a place, but in many cases creating complex relations just makes the problem worse. Personally I would prefer to see editors providing adjacent objects as options for populating some of the tag elements, so if a postcode is identified it can be duplicated. Nominatim does work nicely without the need for the added complication so I'd suggest at least in the UK we do not use 'associatedStreet' at all. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Duff data on facebook
Having lived in Broadway - Worcestershire for many years now, it is getting somewhat irritating that Facebook will not allow me to tag this fact. They for some reason seem to think that Broadway is in Gloucestershire. Various attempts have been made to get things corrected, and pages have been created for 'Worcestershire', but even these are now being redirected to the 'correct' master according to Facebook. Can anybody throw ANY light on to why they insistthat their data is the correct view? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Duff data on facebook
On 09/06/14 12:37, Richard Symonds wrote: Facebook updates the places it has using crowdsourced information from here: https://www.facebook.com/places/editor?ref=br_tf. I'm afraid that's all I know... All of my posts to that from 10 months ago are still showing as 'pending' ... yet the corrections have been replaced by further links to Gloucestershire :( Croudsourcing only works if there is someone bothering to fix the problems ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes
On 10/06/14 08:47, Shaun McDonald wrote: Personally I’d say it’s better to place the postcode on the buildings, as they are delivery points, that the postcode relates to, whereas adding them to the street is both more complex, error prone and not tagging what the postcode actually relates to (i.e. the collection of delivery points). Each building gets a postcode and building identity - number or name. BUT NO STREET. The postcode is attached to the relevant street, which then goes on to provide the additional location hierarchy. That the street may have more than one postcode is not a problem as the location of the buildings gives that fine detail. The problem is how to add multiple postcodes to a single street object? Spliting the street where buildings lie on a sub section is one option, and since we are splitting it for speed limits and other physical boundaries is a given, but a 'relation' that combines all the elements of 'the street' and would allow all of the higher level links to have a single target. This opens the need to allow multiple copies of some tags on a single object? Micro mapping would allow bother sides of a street to be mapped, and if necessary, the correct postcode would tag each side, but the macro view needs both postcodes on a macro view of the way. On 20 May 2014, at 00:33, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: I personally put postcodes on buildings as in my two most common use cases (getting something delivered to my house, and using my GPS to get somewhere) I have become accustomed to being asked for a house number after supplying a postcode. I guess that tagging the street works (although you may need to split it into sections and add :right and :left tag extensions), but it's not something I do. You mentioned the postman walking up the street - well I guess you could say that the walk also includes the driveway up to the front of each house/letterbox. Whether nominatim works or not is a search problem, not a mapping one (i.e. not mapping for the nominatim). -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM
On 05/07/14 22:09, Philip Barnes wrote: Proposed highways should certainly not render, for example I drove through Uttoxeter with osmand running and the proposed highways make the map pretty confusing. But we should be able to adjust the way osmand renders the data? As long as it is tagged properly. But I've yet to get my own copy to even route properly yet via B and 'C' roads. It takes me on a 9 mile detour going north from here :( -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New mapper has imported all Nottingham street lights
On 30/07/14 18:37, tony wroblewski wrote: Actually, this type of import would have been very useful for my own project which uses OSM data for 3D maps. I was a little miffed to see it was simply reverted with no discussion. Good detailed data such as this is lacking very much in the UK, and we're very far behind other countries such as Germany. This sort of action I fear only scares others off from doing the same thing. I'm a little on the fence ... the point about maintaining the data is valid, and nothing has been done to properly address using later updates to the source data to correct information already on the map. However that is no reason to not allow these smaller packets of data. It's imports like 'Tiger' which are just so unmaintainable that needs better tools? If a lamp post is moved it's actually very easy to run a diff between versions of uploads! It just needs an archive of the current import linked to the change set. Of cause what would be nice is if people using data like bus stops, lamp posts and so on could provide an update back to the original source when corrections are identified. I doubt that is going to happen any time soon, so personally I'd say in this case reverting was just petty ... and that this data should be put back ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN (stop) import
On 31/07/14 18:31, Chris Hill wrote: I'd be particularly interested if any council has used the improved OSM data to bring their feed into NaPTAN up to scratch, and if not why not? As the naptan data has a nice unique identifier then it should be possible to do a clean compare of what is on OSM and the raw naptan data? If the location of a node is distance from the raw data, this can be tagged, and if other fields have updated then this data can be updated on OSM. Import wise, if a node already exists, then it would be dropped from a new import. This data really is a nice example that could be developed with data management tools that would then be usable with other data sets such as lamp posts, post boxes, telephone distribution cabinets and the like? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN (stop) import
On 01/08/14 01:36, Will Phillips wrote: I do not believe the stop areas should have been imported at all because they are not verifiable on the ground. Also, I am often unable to find much logic in the groupings other than the stops are relatively close together, so I don't think they are really useful. This is where having a unique ID for ab object comes into it's own. That is if the data source allows you to access that data using it. All that needs to be in the OSM data is 'bus stop' and it's NaPTAN reference, and anything else comes from a secondary read. Although names and the like may be worth duplicating. Where a source of a data import is readily accessible, then we don't need to duplicate the 'non-mapping' data. It may be for some imports we need a private copy of the data to make this work nicely, but that should be a natural part of the import process anyway. A clean copy of what was imported. What is available and easily accessible is growing daily ... but it does not need to be all imported into one database :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN (stop) import
On 01/08/14 16:37, Stuart Reynolds wrote: I haven’t looked at the service tags in any detail, so what I’m about to say may well be there already. But if we want to represent the complexity then we either have to capture the individual departures at a stop or, more likely, try and represent the frequency/regularity of a service on a link. Then renderers could show dotted/thin lines, or put the service number in different colours for infrequent services. Of course, there are plenty of issues around that as well! Which is one of the targets of the 'transport' layer? I't is certainly nice to hear that OSM is providing a stable base to work from, and since your own data needs to be accurate OSM benefits in return. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] A431 toll road
On 04/08/14 12:32, Richard Symonds wrote: The Council has no details to confirm the toll road design meets safety standards and no evidence that insurances are in place for any member of the public who use the private toll road. Just been listening to the news report on the road. Anybody mapped it yet? I get the impression that it is a speculative venture that may well not actually make a profit since the road apparently cost £150k and the overheads of charging will also eat into any profit. The council are concerned about the development since they have to move 4000 tonnes of stone to the problem site, so did not want the increased cost of managing that on to of fixing the road as fast as possible. Perhaps another expense the toll road owner may have to agree to to get retrospective planning permission. It show how poor the road systems are in some areas of the country. Access to Bath could really do with a proper set of dual carriageways from the M4 and going across Bristol to the M5. I frequent that area on business quite often, and am using tertiary roads most of the time simply to get into one side of the distruption, even before the road was closed. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation
On 05/08/14 00:11, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Andrew Hain wrote: It was only put in recently and I personally find it unhelpful. Would anyone object to removing it? Yes. Ditto ... The alternate name tagging is designed where there are alternate names in other languages. Simply writing a name in a different alphabet is something that the renderer can do if required. But this is a discussion for the international list rather than just the UK? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation
On 05/08/14 12:23, SomeoneElse wrote: I will be right saying that I can not know all cities, especially small. I will search ukrainian web articles to see if there is determined translation english-to-ukrainian for them. That's rather more problematical. Under what licence are those web articles published? How do you know that the translation is accurate, and not a poor transliteration (like the Bury St Edmunds example)? How does another mapper verify(1) that the name is correct? This is perhaps my only question as well. The 'on the ground' guide line provides one element of verifiability, and Welsh and Scottish names may well appear on the ground, but since we can't easily verify what is only present in third party material, some link to the source of this third party information would be helpful? Which is why I would prefer to see links to third party sources rather than simply cloning that data into OSM ... I rely on google to provide translations and I presume that the Ukrainian translations provided by google are not 'politically correct'? I'm having a battle with Facebook at the moment over Broadway, Worcestershire since Facebook will not allow it, claiming it's in Gloucestershire ... facts don't apparently have any place in Facebook. This translates to Бродвей, Вустершир in both the Russian and Ukrainian translation, and then a search for those names gives a substantial number of hits. But many of those are in the alternate languages, just as many countries use the 'French' name rather than the English one but for Broadway that is one of the same ... Rather than creating hundreds of 'translations' for every name in OSM, all that is needed is to decide the fallback that you prefer when a specifically different translation is not available. What I may be missing here is if google is getting english-to-ukrainian wrong? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation
On 06/08/14 09:05, Pavlo Dudka wrote: Wikipedia Multilingual Map is available on http://mlm.jochentopf.com/ It works really good. Pavlo - one of the things that has irritated me from day one is the poor way that the data API has been designed. I've been working with relational databases since the 90's and creating structures that are flexible has always been paramount. I'm very much linguistically challenged, but I understand the importance of supporting translations. My comments about secondary databases are along that line, so that rather than having 'english' keys in the main database one has numeric keys and a lookup table which gives a translated view of all of the structure. So one logs in using Ukrainian and sees everything in Ukrainian ... Where something has not got a translation then the lookup has a selections of fall-backs based on YOUR preferences. Place names can then be handled as part of the translation system, rather than entering things manually into database and a fall back there to third party data makes perfect sense. Since there is no move to providing this method of working, I think that we can work with the 'english' keys and implement a service that makes up for this but given the large size of some key text it will take a while to populate :( There are a lot of third party tools but no coordination on managing the translation data. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation
On 06/08/14 13:28, Pavlo Dudka wrote: Lester, I don't agree that ukrainian or other-language place names is secondary information. We should not extract this information to external data source. Why don't you say Let's remove population-tag. Values are changing, let's integrate OSM with some service like http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/index.html;? Reason is very obvious: implementation of integration between dozens different services that use OSM-data and [Translation DB]/[Population DB] is much more expensive than storing translations/population in OSM-DB. Pavlo - you are miss understanding what I am saying ... The primary data in the heart of OSM would not have any 'language' embedded in it. That would come from tables of translated data which are still part of the database, but do not need to be accessed all the time. The main problem with having ALL language data spread all through database is that everybody gets it, while if you ONLY want Ukranian that would be a much smaller data set. For languages where there is no translations built in, a fall back to a third party tool could then be actioned. No doubt someone would use that to populate that language, and this is fine as long as mistakes are corrected. Certainly I would not be using wikipedia myself, but nominatim enhanced with a language selection facility ... still essentially contained within OSM! name/name:en can't be the key for place names Totally agree. There should be a uniqueID for every object in OSM, not one that may change when people make mistakes changing other data :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] C roads again
On 13/08/14 01:22, Robert Norris wrote: However I am in favour of this edit, but I think the edit needs to *only* change 'C' Roads, as some B roads are tagged tertiary. Ditto. But it's a bit like the 'name' problem where a few roads have locally known names, but these are not displayed on signs :( Need recording but not necessarily displaying. On a slightly different tack, the tertiary road designation is more of a problem. While not advocating 'tag for routing', this is one that is making my own use of OSMAND almost impossible, and I can't believe others don't find the problem. It refuses to use the B4632 ( used to be the A46! ) going north from here, and I can't trace why. Roads south are a similar problem, but these a good quality 'C' roads. Should they be 'upgraded' to secondary or should the distinction be removed in OSMAND for UK roads? If I can't trust local routing why should I at a new destination and we are talking a several mile detour here which can add 30mins to the journey. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK addresses
On 12/08/14 20:18, Rob Nickerson wrote: So... how do people tag UK addresses? The standard for representing addresses in Britain is BS7666, which comprises: * Primary addressable object name (PAON), * Secondary addressable object name (SAON), * street, * postcode, * locality (if available), * town, * county This combination of PAON and SAON allows them to do easily capture addresses such as: It STILL irritates me that in some places every building gets the full list of entries. In which ever country of the world. In the UK the 'addressable object' data + postcode is all that is required since the rest can be cloned from the postcode - or some other unique ID for the related object. The structure should support this method of working and then editors could pull up matching data where necessary. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] C roads again
On 13/08/14 08:20, Tom Hughes wrote: On 13/08/14 07:37, Lester Caine wrote: On a slightly different tack, the tertiary road designation is more of a problem. While not advocating 'tag for routing', this is one that is making my own use of OSMAND almost impossible, and I can't believe others don't find the problem. It refuses to use the B4632 ( used to be the A46! ) going north from here, and I can't trace why. Roads south are a similar problem, but these a good quality 'C' roads. Should they be 'upgraded' to secondary or should the distinction be removed in OSMAND for UK roads? If I can't trust local routing why should I at a new destination and we are talking a several mile detour here which can add 30mins to the journey. If you don't like the routing decisions an app makes then talk to it's author or use a different one - certainly don't try and hack the data to make it do what you want. Aside from anything else it might affect other apps routing decisions in entirely different ways. There is a well defined meaning to trunk/primary/secondary for UK roads so please use it. One can select different routers and they all give different results for much the same reason. The 'well defined meaning' is fine from a political point of view, but in rural areas it is failing when used as a means of identifying road quality for routing. I have a number of open posts on this which no one seems interested in discussing, but if you can provide an alternative to OSMAND which will work better I'd be more that willing to check it out. The old TomTom gets it right most of the time so this is just a matter of getting something right. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK addresses
On 13/08/14 08:58, David Woolley wrote: On 13/08/14 08:29, Lester Caine wrote: rest can be cloned from the postcode - or some other unique ID for the related object. Only if you have purchased access to the PAF or National Gazeteer. Capture of the former, on OSM, is patchy, and of the latter is non-existent, or virtually so. That data will be available, but it does not stop using the method to add it to the OSM data currently. If you are adding 50 house numbers you end up using the copy function to add a vast amount of data where one only needs a small subset of that in practice! A lot of postcodes are currently missing and it would be nice simply to import the raw missing stuff, but it does not prevent good practice generally? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] C roads again
On 13/08/14 10:02, Derick Rethans wrote: It's not only C roads. When looking at Nairn (because of a reported storm damage to a road) I noticed lots of U-references. Have a look at: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/194703765 and surrounding area. I doubt those are on signs either, and should also go into official_ref. Slight aside again ... simply because I was checking the status of it ... Anybody know if these 'U' numbers marry up with something in the National Street Gazetteer? That has it's own unique ID - and just for the record, postcode is only a secondary element since there may be several postcodes for a single identified street. It's the NSG that is primary in defining road works locations these days. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK addresses
On 13/08/14 11:36, Will Phillips wrote: 2. I don't agree that tagging only postcode and 'addressable object' is a good idea. To convert that into a full address requires access to a closed database. Surely the whole point about OSM is creating useful data that is open? At the moment we don't even have sufficient open data available to add an accurate postcode to every address. I hope more address data will be made available under an open licence in the future, but at the moment we have to work with what we have got. But the point here is if postcode is made a standard part of tagging addresses then the open data holes will naturally be filled. Currently there are a number of third party sources which could be pressed into use to fill the gap, but it's making them normal use on the ground that will solve the problem ... We do have a lot of postcode data already available but it's perhaps surprising that many objects that have their own postcode are not currently included when that information is available in the original sources. I've just added Ragley Hall postcode but a number of the locations I look at Monday it was missing. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Licences for Highways and PRoW data (Was: C roads again)
On 13/08/14 12:15, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: As far as street names and numbers are concerned, it is the council that is the official authority on these. They have to maintain a written List of Streets Maintainable at the Public Expense. Again if you can persuade the council to let you re-use this under a suitable licence, then all is good. For more information, see http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/council-docs.html Hasn't that been superseded these days? As part of the LLPG requirements (Local Land and Property Gazetteer) councils are now required to maintain the LSG Local Street Gazetteer and both of these then feed into the National version. The NSG is a believe part of 'The New Roads and Street Works Act 1991' https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/street-works-co-ordination for some light reading ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK addresses
On 13/08/14 12:38, SK53 wrote: Postcodes simply do not solve address issues. I'm not saying they do ... Only that there is no point adding 'University of Nottingham, University Park, NOTTINGHAM' to every single location on the campus when 'NG7 2RD' provides the same information? That there are also inconsistencies is probably to be expected since it's human beings that create the original data :) In which case THEN the attached data on the object is used as a higher priority to the linked versions. As I said, a street's identity in NSG has nothing to do with it's postcode and hopefully some time soon we will have open access to that information to mess things up again. The problem is that using this much more consistent id is not something humans will be comfortable with :( -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Licences for Highways and PRoW data (Was: C roads again)
On 13/08/14 15:40, Andy Robinson wrote: The NSG is a closed shop run by the OS and other stakeholders for the management of street works. When the NSG was set up a few years ago I tried to get access and initially during their pilot I sort of did, but this was cut off when the system whet fully live and access limited to the LA's and the statutory undertakers. The reason access was denied was apparently for commercial reasons, in that the statutory undertakers did not want all and sundry to have information on their assets. It does replace the List of Streets Maintainable at the Public Expense but I do seem to recall that since it is created as part of the NLGP process, there was a more recent discussion on it being opened as a base for the open address initiative? On 13/08/14 12:15, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: As far as street names and numbers are concerned, it is the council that is the official authority on these. They have to maintain a written List of Streets Maintainable at the Public Expense. Again if you can persuade the council to let you re-use this under a suitable licence, then all is good. For more information, see http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/council-docs.html Hasn't that been superseded these days? As part of the LLPG requirements (Local Land and Property Gazetteer) councils are now required to maintain the LSG Local Street Gazetteer and both of these then feed into the National version. The NSG is a believe part of 'The New Roads and Street Works Act 1991' https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/street-works-co-ordination for some light reading ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK addresses
On 13/08/14 17:06, Derick Rethans wrote: On 13/08/14 12:38, SK53 wrote: Postcodes simply do not solve address issues. I'm not saying they do ... Only that there is no point adding 'University of Nottingham, University Park, NOTTINGHAM' to every single location on the campus when 'NG7 2RD' provides the same information? Postal street name != Real street name Postal town != Real town So no, it doesn't. On the rare occasions where they are different then one would need new tags to identify the different names, but addr: should always be the correct postal address ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Vandalism in London
On 05/10/14 11:25, Andy Street wrote: I think iD has taken totally the wrong approach. If the concept is too difficult for the target audience, it should have refused the operation, rather than hidden the problem. Simply refusing to delete seems rather unhelpful. I'd much prefer the user to be presented with a dialog box that explains the problem in simple terms before allowing them to either continue with the delete or seek assistance. If the user requires assistance a note could be opened stating something along the lines of I require assistance deleting element x for reason y, please help me.. Which sort of ties in with my constraints on relations. If an edit is breaking something it's easy enough to say unable to proceed because ... but ideally the API should be able to find a new missing bit and add it into the relation? Only blocking something when the new edit does create a conflict because the relation is now broken? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors
On 05/10/14 17:58, Stuart Reynolds wrote: This is digressing somewhat into a discussion about NaPTAN but before I get into that point, if I can just pick up on the comment about leaving things in because it shows a history of what the data looked like. Sorry, but OSM IS a dynamic data set and doesn't AFAIK have the facility to keep a history in that sense. Personally I would not want to see a road alignment that no longer existed- it would be clutter. None of the history would be displayed on the 'current' map, but correctly handled objects that have yet to be constructed would have a start date in the future and renderers could include or ignore them, and historic material would have an end date set which the renderers would also respect. A view of the data with any out of scope material suppressed is easy to implement, but at present we still don't have a reliable method of archiving material even if that involves transferring it to a separate copy of the whole database which can be used by historic rendering applications. We are not asking 'current only' mappers to do anything as the detail is already mapped, and there are a number of projects using archives like the Library of Scotland scans to add a lot more historic material. A large proportion if that history is being used on the current map to fill in house numbers and other fine detail so the idea of two separate databases simply does not make any sense going forward. The bulk of the additional data is simply adding the correct start date to already mapped existing objects! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors
On 05/10/14 21:43, David Woolley wrote: On 05/10/14 14:11, Lester Caine wrote: Which sort of ties in with my constraints on relations. If an edit is breaking something it's easy enough to say unable to proceed because ... but ideally the API should be able to find a new missing bit and add it into the relation? Only blocking something when the new edit does create a conflict because the relation is now broken? JOSM, rather than the API, already does this for way splits, although it doesn't handle some of the more complex cases of splitting roundabouts well. I wouldn't be surprised if iD did as well. It is deletions and effective deletions (like removing one direction by adding oneway=yes) that are difficult to automate. If you did automate them, I think the editor would need to tag the relations for review. There are many reason why the information needed to make a good guess might not be available at the time needed. Changes of direction and things like that certainly impact on routing grids, but I was more concerned initially in maintaining the integrity of the basic way, more for boundaries but also for way relations which are intended to be a single way. Flagging up roundabout is probably a very good example as I have to admit to having added the odd one in recent years, but not been sure if it broke anything. If the road that was broken ad been part of a boundary, then the original straight line segment that was removed needed to be retained. Historically as an indication on where the road went prior to the construction of the roundabout, but also as an ongoing boundary segment straight across the new roundabout, with other routing relations using the correct roundabout segment :) All achievable if the API monitors the constraints on relations and checks that what JOSM submits is complete. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors
On 06/10/14 09:26, David Woolley wrote: On 05/10/14 22:28, Lester Caine wrote: All achievable if the API monitors the constraints on relations and checks that what JOSM submits is complete. That would represent a radical change in design philosophy. At the moment, the code behind the API (I standards interface) implements very few business rules. All it really knows about relations is that all the members must be currently live objects. It implements the business rules by refusing changes outright. The big advantage of that approach is that it allows decentralised addition of new features. Anyone can add a new tag, tag value, or relation type and create clients and, possibly, renderers that use them, without needing a central authority to write code to support them. Currently, it is the editors that implement business rules. Whilst you could have common libraries, JOSM would need a Java one, but other clients would need ones for other languages or platforms. The decentralised approach only works if ALL the edit tools are able to ensure data integrity. We are now adding a layer of material that can only be created by relations, and if someone is going to have to manually check every one when any changes are added to the general area it can only get worse. Coastline is probably a good example of the problems maintaining continuous relations? That Antje has spent a lot of time creating data which is now being destroyed is the problem and I'd rather see some edits blocked instead of breaking the integrity of other data. I don't see that a test for a constraint ensuring continuity is a block to decentralisation, if only to flag that something does need fixing! This is not a 'radical change' but rather that we now need tools that can handle this secondary layer of material. This may need more tools like the coastline tests but the underlying 'rules' still need to be respected. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors
On 06/10/14 10:35, David Woolley wrote: On 05/10/14 21:31, David Woolley wrote: Whilst the archive exists and is accessible, what I'm not aware of is an API interface that allows one to retrieve the versions of objects that existed at a particular date. It has been pointed out to me, off list, that the overpass API can retrieve a back-dated version. Although I haven't tried this out yet, this would seem to be the option: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Overpass_API/Overpass_QL#Attic_data_.28.22date.22.29. The information is available, but as yet there is no joined up method of doing some things. As far as I am aware. That allows you to see the state of the data at a time, but not a view of what exists at that time. If the start_date is correctly added to every object in an area of the map, then by changing the limit created by selecting a particular date, you see a set of data based on that date. This is fine for objects that still exist, but leaves a hole where objects have changed and it is this that OHM is trying to address. Trying to merge data from the current 'filtered' view and some alternate source is the tricky bit. Reading a CURRENT set of data will include the state_date tag and so filtering that can happen locally, but adding the essentially quite small amount of historic changes is not so easy to achieve? -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Confused over access...
On 18/10/14 13:18, David Woolley wrote: Following on from what the others say, I think the Bus tag is redundant in this instance, as it's a subset of psv=yes I didn't think that bus was a separate category. Moreover, although taxis were previously mentioned, I don't believe they are legally public service vehicles in the UK, as they carry less than eight passengers and don't normally trade at separate fare: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/14/section/1 (In particular, it looks to me as though the 8 limit was chosen to exclude taxis and minicabs.) Buses are generally PSV vehicles, but there are classifications of bus which avoid the need for a PSV licence. Additionally Taxi may be classified as a PSV after obtaining a special licence. This is all to do with the *9* or more passenger capacity, and if passengers are charged an individual fare. Something of a minefield since it is open to discussion in fringe areas. When referring to access rules signs will often say 'Buses and Taxis' or 'Buses Only' rather than 'PSV' simply because school buses may not hold PSV licences. So ARE there examples where 'PSV' is a valid restriction and has anybody issued school buses using the route with tickets ;) It is any use of 'psv' in relation to access which is of dubious provenance in OSM and even Taxi needs to be qualified where local rules add other limits such as only Black cabs in London. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/194259/PSV_Operator_Licensing_Guide.pdf documents the minefield, but does not identify who can and can't use UK restricted roads :) -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] addressing (was addr:place)
On 26/10/14 21:58, Andy Street wrote: We in OSM can do SO much better and we must not use the imaginary, spurious and wholly wrong concept of Royal Fail's postal town. Postal towns are not real and have no place in OSM. Okay, now I'm confused! I know what Royal Mail considers my address to be and that includes a post town. If post towns have no place in OSM then presumably we have either adopted another addressing standard or created our own. Can someone please point me in the direction of a document describing how addresses in OpenStreetMap are derived? The correct information is contained in a reference we are not allowed to use. The NLPG - National Land and Property Gazetteer. In that the correct places and town names are used for the cross link references in the National Street Gazetteer. Post Codes are cross referenced, but to not form a 'primary' key since there ARE deemed to be of secondary importance and may not be accurate. The LLPG files that I have private access to throw up some interesting problems when trying to create a post code table from them since the front line staff prefer to use that as a quick means of finding a persons address, so one has to cheat to get it to work in cases like those already highlighted. Camden and the like are places in London, but nowadays London tends to get classified as a 'county' and then the boroughs are 'towns' but neither models are particularly accurate? The metropolitan areas simply don't fit a 'place/town' model. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] addressing (was addr:place)
On 27/10/14 01:04, Andy Street wrote: How can you determine the postal town from a survey? In my local area all addresses within a postcode district share the same post town. But bare in mind that some roads may well go there several postal towns. The Uxbridge Road in London comes to mind here, although do we have 'Ermine Street' as a single entity? :) By the way http://www.nlpg.org.uk/nlpg/link.htm?nwid=19 gives a nice summary, and while the data is not freely available - yet - http://www.iahub.net/docs/1367594535007.pdf has all the details and even defines a few areas like bridleway, cycletrack and the like! -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] addressing (was addr:place)
On 27/10/14 09:24, Andy Robinson wrote: Are the postal towns not the town that is represented by the first part of the postcode? So CW for Crewe for instance. My parents live in Swaffham in Norfolk but Royal Mail have them is Cambridgeshire with a PE (Peterborough) postcode. Not exclusively! Properties are grouped by the delivery area footprint covered by sorting offices which in some areas may not align even with local ward boundaries! There have been some examples given of different area postcodes for different sides of a street in the past. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names
On 31/10/14 22:51, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Voting is now open for the proposal to unify the names of chain shops within the UK by renaming them. Please cast your vote at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. More information can be found on this page as well. Brantano (UK) Limited shops are all branded 'Brantano Footwear' that is their shop 'Logo' On the whole the changes seem logical, but I'd rather they were applied manually than setting a precedent to allow changes that may not ACTUALLY apply as some small outlet is being a little economic with the name they are using ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names
On 01/11/14 01:45, Matthijs Melissen wrote: On the whole the changes seem logical, but I'd rather they were applied manually than setting a precedent to allow changes that may not ACTUALLY apply as some small outlet is being a little economic with the name they are using ... I would guess that's a rather hypothetical situation. Do you have any example? More a case that any attempt to do the job properly' and create proper relational data by using any table of 'valid' data and only allowing a reference to that table to be used has always been frowned upon. If we are going to 'dictate' what is acceptable content it should be managed properly rather than blindly re-writing tags. I'm not saying that the changes are wrong ... just that this is not the right method to get things done. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names
On 01/11/14 13:36, Dan S wrote: Also, Matthijs sent out an RFC email proposing this whole process - he got lots of feedback (which he has taken into consideration), but no-one objected to the voting mechanism. It's not your fault if you only just noticed this happening, of course, but it's a little rude to declare No it isn't in the sense of shutting him down when he's proceeding in such an open and consultative manner. Lots of people have discussed Matthijs' proposed changes in the RFC thread and now this thread. To me, it seems a good example of consultation. Many times in the past we have objected to someone's 'automatic' updating of material. My first objection here is that so many changes are being lumped into a single 'edit'. As a very minimum each change should be handled on it's own merit, but as people have been checking some of the data, the more important question is if a problem as been confirmed by actual surveying on the ground then WHY hasn't that person already updated the tag, and then we have a real person in the change history who HAS checked rather than hundreds of random changes grouped under the banner 'These were probably wrong!'. More important! If details HAVE been surveyed and tag in a way that this change then reverts a correct local input how does one then identify those changes and prevent editing now and in the future if someone decides that there are still 'mistakes' that have not been fixed. The rule is that on the whole tags are always free format text. We would not refuse an edit just because it's value 'appears' to be a spelling mistake, and that principle is enshrined in the current guidelines, so we need editors to ensure that the data they are imputing *IS* correct! Personally I would prefer that every one of the identified 'problems' resulted in a message to the original editor asking them to check rather than blindly making an executive decision that something has to be wrong :( Yes we want consistent data, but that is not achieved by blindly making it consistent ... -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names
On 02/11/14 14:06, Matthijs Melissen wrote: It is by the way not true that there is no precedent to use votes for mechanical edits - the retagging of musical instrument shops has been discussed in a similar way, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Musical_instrument and the corresponding discussion on the tagging list. Tidying a tag value is a different case to amending free format text. That a tagging method evolves is well documented, and other uses of those tags can be cleanly documented even if the merged 'spellings' may actually refer to a different meaning. The renamed tags can be reviewed fairly easily and may identify additional changes. I hope this clarifies this procedure, and I also hope it at least takes part of your worries away. The free format areas are not documented on the wiki although a case could be made for creating guide lines on a country by country basis. What ever happens I think that the availability of adding comments/discussion to a change set perhaps highlights another reason why if any of these are applied, each should have it's own commit and then if there is any follow up required it is easy to discuss that via the change set and revert if required. I still prefer this to be a more manual process for free format material, but if each change is documented and processed as any objections are addressed it will mitigate a little the lack of any real observations confirming the need for a change ... and opens the door to correcting any collateral damage more easily. -- 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-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
