Re: [talk-au] Small culverts/bridges in bushland

[Jonathon Rossi]

>
> If you 'jump across it' I'd go for ford. Reason ... it is not a bridge,
> nor a culvert both of which require infrastructure.
> The ford to me give warning that I might get wet feet, and that if flooded
> I may have to wait.
> So that is the 'best fit' where the crossing has nothing other than what
> nature has provided.
>

When I said "more significant bridges (maybe anything you couldn't jump
across)", I meant that without the bridge you couldn't jump across. There
definitely is man made infrastructure, but they are small and just "anchor"
on either side of the stream.

I should have done this at the beginning, I've got some random examples
from Google Images that should help illustrate what I'm referring to.

Easy to jump over on foot, more just a convenience bridge especially for
wheeled users:
- https://cdn-files.apstatic.com/mtb/7018727_large_1495548882.jpg
- https://cdn-files.apstatic.com/mtb/7000400_medium_1418669614.jpg
- https://cdn-files.apstatic.com/mtb/7005254_medium_1442023869.jpg
-
https://i.wnc.io/s1024/2016-12-20_pisgah-bent-creek_small-creek-trail-sign-and-bridge.jpg
-
http://www.fotwheel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/preacher-bridge-1000x1000.jpg

Too big to jump on foot (or too deep), so map it:
-
http://fearlessenterprising.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/small-garden-bridge-plans-bright-inspiration-9-bridges-home-outdoor-decoration.jpg
-
https://i.wnc.io/s1024/2016-12-20_pisgah-bent-creek_homestead-trail-orange-blaze-bridge.jpg
- http://pantra.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/BB-B2-300x225.jpg
-
https://media.alienadv.com/walking-over-bamboo-bridge-tea-estate-kerala-MTB-adventure-india-85C_750px.jpg
-
https://i.wnc.io/s1024/2004-01-04_pisgah-bent-creek_homestead-trail-at-small-creek-bridge.jpg

-- 
Jono
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] June meeting

[Rob Nickerson]

Our meeting is this Thursday. I seem to recall that we picked Nuneaton. Any
pub suggestions?

Please let me know if you're going. I shall be there.

Um, what is it... Meet in pub from 8pm?

Best regards,
Rob
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [talk-au] Small culverts/bridges in bushland

[Warin]

On 30/05/18 02:26, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
I finally got a response on the changeset, thanks for the pointer 
Warin. The response unfortunately isn't the clearest explanation of 
why fords were added when a ground survey wasn't performed since you 
can rarely see culverts from aerial imagery.


> I have only ever mapped what is on the ground. There's always some 
way for a path the cross a stream - ford, culvert, bridge etc. It just 
seems a bit trivial when you have a path crossing a mapped stream that 
is so small you can jump across it.


@Ian @Warin I definitely don't want to start edit wars which is why 
I'm here, and I do see how mapping a culvert/bridge as a node on the 
respective way is problematic because it isn't at the 
intersection/overlapping of both ways. Glad to hear you too Ian have 
run into this exact problem with somewhat trivial culverts/bridges, 
exactly as you said that are small enough you could jump over. I 
thought others would have weighed in with their opinion, so in lieu of 
that, I think I'll just start mapping all culverts by splitting 
waterways but only split highways (to reduce mismatching tag pain) for 
more significant bridges (maybe anything you couldn't jump across) 
unless I'm removing an erroneously mapped ford (and I'll reconsider).


If you 'jump across it' I'd go for ford. Reason ... it is not a bridge, 
nor a culvert both of which require infrastructure.
The ford to me give warning that I might get wet feet, and that if 
flooded I may have to wait.
So that is the 'best fit' where the crossing has nothing other than what 
nature has provided.



Thanks

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:25 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> wrote:


On 23/05/18 00:56, Jonathon Rossi wrote:

Hi,

Lately a mapper has been adding heaps of fords in SE QLD bushland
along with more creeks/streams, however I've noticed quite a lot
of the fords aren't actually fords based on my local knowledge of
the area. I tried commenting on a changeset
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58540304
) 2 weeks ago
and again a week ago without a response, they have been active in
that time and appear to be a long time contributor, but I'm now
at a loss on how to contact them.


Request a 0 hour block from the Data Working Group ...
This stops further edits until they acknowledge the problem.


My question isn't about what they've been doing, but about the
fact I've not wanted to split ways and try to line up a tiny
culvert or bridge when they are physically so small, however
because they haven't been mapped someone is now incorrectly added
fords. Many of the culverts are just a small pipe (sometimes as
small as 20mm diameter and 0.5m long) with dirt over it to keep
the trail dry (the trail is usually built up a little in the low
lying area), and many of the bridges are only a metre long timber
bridge especially those added for MTB.

The wiki states that bridge=* and tunnel=* should not be used on
nodes, so I've not used them and in the past only mapped fords
(many which have big sized gravel or stepping stones) and
obviously use a shared node.

I've read a bunch of discussion on this topic and agree that
splitting ways to model these is overkill as the tags on each way
can get out of sync and get in the way, but removing the
incorrect fords and not putting something in their place irks me.
The wiki's comment about a ford: "You are both on the highway and
in the waterway, and not separated logically as a stream under a
bridge would be" makes complete sense, and I don't want shared
nodes for these cases even though many streams are intermittent.

Finally my question, why couldn't we map a culvert as a node of a
waterway, or a bridge as a node of a highway? The only other
option I can think of is to add a note to a node of
highway/waterway describing what is there so someone doesn't add
a ford.


OSM rules - anything you like...
So you could map them as nodes... but other mappers could remove
them. Edit wars.

A culvert should be on the crossing of water and a path/road.

I also have concerns that another mapper has added water crossing
details ... base on nothing other than the presence in OSM of a
crossing .. the details are not viewable in imagery.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-at] Vervollständigung der Wiener Adressen

[Markus Straub]

Hallo!

Gut, dass das im Forum festgehalten wurde - Stand am 12. Februar 2018 
nach dem Löschen des geocodec-Imports:


@count  @count:nodes @count:ways @count:relations
114204  7456138446   1197

Stand 29. Mai 2018:

@count  @count:nodes @count:ways @count:relations
129245  7787250155   1218

Als OGD sind unter 
https://www.data.gv.at/katalog/dataset/1d5c2411-9719-4c8f-b99d-57a5f4a4ae41 
insgesamt etwa 286.000 Adressen enthalten, allerdings sind hier z.B. 
Albertplatz 7/1 und Albertplatz 7/2 jeweils gesonderte Einträge - reine 
Hausnummern sind es weniger.


LG, Markus / evod


On 2018-05-29 22:31, Johann Haag wrote:
Am 29. Mai 2018 um 21:47 schrieb Markus Straub 
mailto:markus.straub...@gmail.com>>:


Grüß euch!

Seit Februar ist einiges passiert und die adressfreien Flecken in
Wien lichten sich mit vereinten Kräften langsam (auch wenn es z.B.
im 22. noch einiges zu tun gibt).

Wisst ihr ob es irgendwo Statistiken ähnlich der building coverage
(http://osm-austria-building-coverage.thomaskonrad.at/
) gibt?


Tipp: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=684610#p684610

Grüsse Wiki The Map


LG,
Markus / evod



On 2018-02-25 12:14, andreas wecer wrote:

Ich habe in den letzten Tagen ein paar Adressen in Favoriten
ergänzt, wobei auch in meiner unmittelbareren Umgebung im
südlichen Speckgürtel diesbezüglich noch genügend zu tun wäre.
An Tools verwende ich die regio-osm Hausnummernauswertung:
http://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/auswertung_auswahlort

Wie bei allen Hilfsmitteln ist auch dieses mit Vorsicht zu
genießen. Es ist bspw. sehr penibel bei der Schreibweise, matcht
dabei auch nur den Namen und nicht auch official_name (ich gehe
davon aus, alt_name auch nicht) und neben Identadressen an
Straßenecken, von denen die Hausbesitzer gar nichts wissen,
kenne ich in meinem Heimatort auch Adressen, die gar nicht
existieren, weil an der Stelle neue Straßen eingezogen wurden.
Also es ist ein tolles Hilfsmittel, aber die Prozentanzahl
sollte man wie immer bei so etwas nicht als die reine Wahrheit
ansehen.

Ansonsten sind natürlich der schon erwähnte Address Helper und
auch der JOSM-Stil Coloured Streets empfehlenswert

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 7:12 PM Markus Straub
mailto:markus.straub...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:

     Abseits der Stiegendiskussion gibt es ja noch
     genügend klare Fälle von Einfamilienhäusern in der Peripherie


Dort gibt es dann dafür mehrere Reihenhäuser an einer Adresse ;p
Im Übrigen formatiert die Suche beim Wiener Stadtplan diese
nicht immer nur mit "/1", sondern auch schon mal als "(HAUS 1)",
wie es auch vor Ort oft angeschrieben ist.

https://www.wien.gv.at/stadtplan/grafik.aspx?lang=de-AT=ebeKRtT-cmEVwDc1D1rNGQ-a5Rphlnqnnkur2pH4Oprw-b-b=10458379



LG Andreas


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at



___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at





--
Elektronikermeister Johann Haag
Innsbruckerstraße 42
6380 St. Johann in Tirol
ÖSTERREICH
Tel: +43 664/174 7414
Mailto:johannh...@hxg.at 


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at



___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-ja] ２つのwayがぴったり重なっている？

[tomoya muramoto]

こんにちは。

確かに重なっていました。
修正してみましたのでご確認いただければと思います。

muramoto
___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Ivo Reano]

>
>
> per alberi monumentali c’è denotation:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:denotation
>


Prendo nota della differenza. Ma non credo che nella mappa si voglia
inserire tutti gli alberi. Oltre a essere immane, bisognerebbe decidere
cos'è un albero.
Un germoglio è da mappare? E un albero di una specie arbustiva?

ed evidentemente usato solo per "abbellire la mappa".
> E mi sono chiesto se è il caso di lasciare una fila di pioppi che, tra
> l'altro, sono già stati tagliati...
>
>
>
> se sono morti no.
>
> ciao,
> Martin
>

Martin! Il pioppo non è ceduo! Se lo tagli alla base muore...
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Wochennotiz Nr. 409 15.05.2018–21.05.2018

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 409 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der 
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

https://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2018/05/wochennotiz-nr-409-2/

Wir würden uns freuen, wenn ihr uns nicht nur als Leser, sondern auch
als Meldungsschreiber unterstützen würde.  Wer nicht nur Gast, sondern
Autor in unserem Meldungssammelsystems [1] sein möchte, möge sich
bitte unter Angabe seines OSM-Benutzernames per E-Mail unter
b...@openstreetmap.de melden.

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!


[1] https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/osmbc.html
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Wochennotiz Nr. 409 15.05.2018–21.05.2018

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 409 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der 
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

https://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2018/05/wochennotiz-nr-409-2/

Wir würden uns freuen, wenn ihr uns nicht nur als Leser, sondern auch
als Meldungsschreiber unterstützen würde.  Wer nicht nur Gast, sondern
Autor in unserem Meldungssammelsystems [1] sein möchte, möge sich
bitte unter Angabe seines OSM-Benutzernames per E-Mail unter
b...@openstreetmap.de melden.

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!


[1] https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/osmbc.html
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Vervollständigung der Wiener Adressen

[Johann Haag]

Am 29. Mai 2018 um 21:47 schrieb Markus Straub :

> Grüß euch!
>
> Seit Februar ist einiges passiert und die adressfreien Flecken in Wien
> lichten sich mit vereinten Kräften langsam (auch wenn es z.B. im 22. noch
> einiges zu tun gibt).
>
> Wisst ihr ob es irgendwo Statistiken ähnlich der building coverage (
> http://osm-austria-building-coverage.thomaskonrad.at/) gibt?
>

Tipp: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=684610#p684610

Grüsse Wiki The Map


> LG,
> Markus / evod
>
>
>
> On 2018-02-25 12:14, andreas wecer wrote:
>
>> Ich habe in den letzten Tagen ein paar Adressen in Favoriten ergänzt,
>> wobei auch in meiner unmittelbareren Umgebung im südlichen Speckgürtel
>> diesbezüglich noch genügend zu tun wäre.
>> An Tools verwende ich die regio-osm Hausnummernauswertung:
>> http://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/auswertung_auswahlort
>> Wie bei allen Hilfsmitteln ist auch dieses mit Vorsicht zu genießen. Es
>> ist bspw. sehr penibel bei der Schreibweise, matcht dabei auch nur den
>> Namen und nicht auch official_name (ich gehe davon aus, alt_name auch
>> nicht) und neben Identadressen an Straßenecken, von denen die Hausbesitzer
>> gar nichts wissen, kenne ich in meinem Heimatort auch Adressen, die gar
>> nicht existieren, weil an der Stelle neue Straßen eingezogen wurden. Also
>> es ist ein tolles Hilfsmittel, aber die Prozentanzahl sollte man wie immer
>> bei so etwas nicht als die reine Wahrheit ansehen.
>>
>> Ansonsten sind natürlich der schon erwähnte Address Helper und auch der
>> JOSM-Stil Coloured Streets empfehlenswert
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 7:12 PM Markus Straub > > wrote:
>>
>> Abseits der Stiegendiskussion gibt es ja noch
>> genügend klare Fälle von Einfamilienhäusern in der Peripherie
>>
>>
>> Dort gibt es dann dafür mehrere Reihenhäuser an einer Adresse ;p
>> Im Übrigen formatiert die Suche beim Wiener Stadtplan diese nicht immer
>> nur mit "/1", sondern auch schon mal als "(HAUS 1)", wie es auch vor Ort
>> oft angeschrieben ist.
>> https://www.wien.gv.at/stadtplan/grafik.aspx?lang=de-AT;
>> bookmark=ebeKRtT-cmEVwDc1D1rNGQ-a5Rphlnqnnkur2pH4Oprw-b-b=10458379
>>
>> LG Andreas
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-at mailing list
>> Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
>>
>>
> ___
> Talk-at mailing list
> Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
>



-- 
Elektronikermeister Johann Haag
Innsbruckerstraße 42
6380 St. Johann in Tirol
ÖSTERREICH
Tel: +43 664/174 7414
Mailto:johannh...@hxg.at
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Wochennotiz Nr. 408 08.05.2018–14.05.2018

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 408 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der 
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

https://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2018/05/wochennotiz-nr-409/

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Wochennotiz Nr. 408 08.05.2018–14.05.2018

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 408 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der 
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

https://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2018/05/wochennotiz-nr-409/

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-de] OSM mit Google-Lizenz? - Direktvermarkter

[Garry]

Am 23.05.2018 um 18:56 schrieb Manuel Reimer:

On 05/19/2018 03:05 PM, Harald Hartmann wrote:

Hmm, also wenn ich in der Karte von den Google Kacheln weiter reinzoome
bis die OSM Kacheln kommen (Maßstab 1km), kommt unten rechts auch der
Hinweis "Karte @ OpenStreetMap contributors, CC BY SA 4.0" ... kann man
so machen. Ich sehe da jetzt keinen "groben" Verstoß.


Ich frage mich eher warum man sich diese Mühe überhaupt gemacht hat.

Anscheinend erhofft man sich irgendeinen Vorteil davon beim weiteren 
Rauszoomen Google-Kacheln zu haben. Dieser Vorteil erschließt sich mir 
nur nicht... 
Man kombiniert die "besseren"(?)/ gewohnten Router-Eigenschaften (für 
Google-Nutzer) mit der höheren Detailschärfe von OSM?


Garry

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-it] nuovo WMS 2017 Comune di Bologna

[Maurizio Napolitano]

> E' un piacere annunciarvi che il Comune di Bologna ha esposto il WMS
> http://dati.comune.bologna.it/node/3446 delle ortofoto 2017 a 17cm/px
> utilizzando per la prima volta un addendum ODbL
> http://dati.comune.bologna.it/node/3449 che applicato alla CC BY 4.0
> permette in maniera molto semplice di rendere i dati pubblicati
> compatibili con OSM.

La notizia chiaramente mi fa piacere perchè diventa una sorta di 'overhide"
del problema di chiedere il permesso.
Permesso un po' particolare questo perchè non si tratta proprio di un
import di dati, ma del ricalcare una immagine dove - forse - il discorso
della cc-by si può fermare al solo commento nel changeset, in quanto, poi,
la creazione del dataset rimane opera dell'ingegno della persona che ci ha
lavorato.
Di fatto, se dalla foto aerea, una persona interpreta un fiume con una
strada, di certo non è colpa dell'immagine di origine ma sua.
Eventualmente il problema può essere sulla sbagliata di riproiezione (e tra
l'altro abbiamo anche una flotta di errori grazie a Bing).
Mi rendo conto che è borderline la mia osservazione.

Quanto invece alla proposta di una modifica alla CC-BY usando l'escamotage
della creative commons plus, mi viene il dubbio che qualcuno che ha lo
stesso problema della gestione dell'attribuzione, potrebbe appellarsi al
concetto della mancata neutralità del "servizio" offerto.

Provo a sentire qualche giurista.

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-at] Vervollständigung der Wiener Adressen

[Markus Straub]

Grüß euch!

Seit Februar ist einiges passiert und die adressfreien Flecken in Wien 
lichten sich mit vereinten Kräften langsam (auch wenn es z.B. im 22. 
noch einiges zu tun gibt).


Wisst ihr ob es irgendwo Statistiken ähnlich der building coverage 
(http://osm-austria-building-coverage.thomaskonrad.at/) gibt?


LG,
Markus / evod



On 2018-02-25 12:14, andreas wecer wrote:
Ich habe in den letzten Tagen ein paar Adressen in Favoriten ergänzt, 
wobei auch in meiner unmittelbareren Umgebung im südlichen Speckgürtel 
diesbezüglich noch genügend zu tun wäre.
An Tools verwende ich die regio-osm Hausnummernauswertung: 
http://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/auswertung_auswahlort
Wie bei allen Hilfsmitteln ist auch dieses mit Vorsicht zu genießen. Es 
ist bspw. sehr penibel bei der Schreibweise, matcht dabei auch nur den 
Namen und nicht auch official_name (ich gehe davon aus, alt_name auch 
nicht) und neben Identadressen an Straßenecken, von denen die 
Hausbesitzer gar nichts wissen, kenne ich in meinem Heimatort auch 
Adressen, die gar nicht existieren, weil an der Stelle neue Straßen 
eingezogen wurden. Also es ist ein tolles Hilfsmittel, aber die 
Prozentanzahl sollte man wie immer bei so etwas nicht als die reine 
Wahrheit ansehen.


Ansonsten sind natürlich der schon erwähnte Address Helper und auch der 
JOSM-Stil Coloured Streets empfehlenswert


On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 7:12 PM Markus Straub 
mailto:markus.straub...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Abseits der Stiegendiskussion gibt es ja noch
genügend klare Fälle von Einfamilienhäusern in der Peripherie


Dort gibt es dann dafür mehrere Reihenhäuser an einer Adresse ;p
Im Übrigen formatiert die Suche beim Wiener Stadtplan diese nicht immer 
nur mit "/1", sondern auch schon mal als "(HAUS 1)", wie es auch vor Ort 
oft angeschrieben ist.

https://www.wien.gv.at/stadtplan/grafik.aspx?lang=de-AT=ebeKRtT-cmEVwDc1D1rNGQ-a5Rphlnqnnkur2pH4Oprw-b-b=10458379

LG Andreas


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at



___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

[Talk-it] R: Visualizzazione delle tracce caricate

[Loris Aguzzoli]

Grazie  Martin
Buona serata.

Inviato da Posta per Windows 10

Da: Martin Koppenhoefer
Inviato: martedì 29 maggio 2018 18:58
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] Visualizzazione delle tracce caricate

Ho visto anche in un altro forum che ci sono questi problemi, credo potrebbe 
essere un bug (o forse appositamente?) legato alla nuova direttiva privacy 
della Comunità Europea.

Ciao,
Martin

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-ee] maakonna piirid ja mere-alad

[Peep Aedviir]

Tere!

Eesti territoriaalvesi on tõesti jagatud piltlikult omavalitsuste vahel ära
kuid reaalset valitseda nad seda ei saa. Meri kuulub Riigile ja igasugune
tegutsemine riigimeres tähendab riigiga kooskõlastamist ehk vee
erikasutusluba. Kaasa arvatud juhul kui omavalitsus ise soovib seal midagi
korraldada, ehitada, süvendada, piirata jne. On muidugi siseveekogud mis
kuuluvad munitsipaalomandisse nagu näiteks Haapsalus Väike viik kus võib
omanik oma nägemise järgi tegutseda. Omavalitsustele ikkagi kõige tähtsam
piir on halduspiir, merega külgnevatel aladel võrdsustub see merepiiriga
mida iga aasta korrigeeritakse.
Saared, laiud ja rahud on suhteliselt konkreetselt jagatud omavalitsuste
vahel ära ja just eelneva kaardi alusel. Pigem kasutatakse seda kaarti just
saarte haldusala jagamiseks.
Minu ettepanek on segaduste vältimiseks neid merealade piire mitte kaardile
kanda. Reaalselt on vajalikud ikka maakonna ja omavalitsuste piirid. Seda
enam, et maaamet ise ei pane neid avalikule kaardile.

Peep Aedviir

29. mai 2018 19:36 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :

>
> Ma saan aru, et kogu riigi territoorium on ilusti jagatud omavalitsuste
> vahel ära, ja ei vee ega maa territooriumi saa olla, mis omavalitsemata
> oleks; või mitme alla jääks. Selle kohta peaks mingi seadus või määrus
> olema konkreetselt ka, aga kes seda leida oskab :)
>
> See, kellele maa kuulub või kas üldse kellelegi kuulub on täiesti omaette
> küsimus, vesi valdavalt on riigi oma jah, kuigi on ka erakrunte mis mõned
> meetrid merd enda alla hammustavad igasugu veidratel põhjustel. Seda
> omandiprobleemi me siin ei lahenda. “Kuulumine” on ses mõttes halb mõiste,
> et võib tähendada omandit kui haldusjaotust.
>
> Jaak
>
> > On 29 May 2018, at 19:04, Raul Kern  wrote:
> >
> > Samas Veeseaduse (https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/VeeS) järgi kuuluvad
> > sisemeri ja territoriaalmeri riigile.
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> > Kontakt Mihkel Oviir () kirjutas kuupäeval T,
> 29.
> > mai 2018 kell 18:16:
> >
> >> Jaak, need ongi maa-ametist shp-failina alla laetud.
> >
> >> 29. mai 2018 16:35 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :
> >
> >>> Äge! Ühesõnaga, vesi on meil omavalitsetud, järelikult ka maakondades.
> > Et see nüüd korralikult sisse viia, tuleks tehniliselt vist puhas kõikide
> > kustutus+import teha... Aga sisse viia ilmselt tuleks, kuigi sellel on ka
> > mitmeid miinuseid, nagu nimede paigutus (võib pakkumisi teha, kuhu
> Tallinna
> > nimi uue tsentroidiga läheb), pindala arvutus (aga geoinformaatik teeb
> > lihtsalt maa maski) jms.
> >
> >>> Eelduseks on korralikult vektoris nende kättesaamine mõistagi. Äkki on
> > neil siis nüüd need nii kindlalt paigas, kui avalikult näidata julevad,
> > siis tulevad shaped ka sellised?
> >
> >>> Jaak
> >
> >
> >>> On 29 May 2018, at 15:29, Mihkel Oviir  wrote:
> >
> >>> Kusjuures, just hiljuti hakkas maa-amet jagama omavalitsuste
> kaardikihti
> > mille piirid on nn välispiirini.
> >
> >>> 
> >
> >>> 29. mai 2018 14:42 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :
> >
>  Tere,
> >
>  Mõni aasta tagasi võtsin Maaametisse kõne sel teemal. Nendel
> > shapefailidel ei ole tõesti maakondi meres, samas hoolikalt vaadates
> online
> > kaarti võis tuvastada, et laiud jms jäävad mingi maakonna sisse küll.
> > Vastus oli umbes selline, et põhimõtteliselt on jagatud meri maakondade
> > vahel ära küll, aga piiride detailides on piisavalt palju ebamäärasusi,
> et
> > avalikult jagataval kaardil nad seda näidata ei julge, tuleb veel mingeid
> > jamasid või pretensioone kellelgi. Samas, kui õigesti mäletan, siis
> > omavalitsustele merealasid ikkagi ei jagata, ainult kuiva maad. Mis vahel
> > on päris huvitav, nt Keila linnal olid mingid laiud teistpool Pakri saari
> > vist.
> >
>  Pärast viimast haldusreformi on jälle mõned maakonnapiirid muutunud
> > (Pärnu-Läänemaa piir mere osas vist küll ainsana), ja maakonna enda
> > tähenduski hajunud. On sel üldse muud tähtsust kui tasuta ühistranspordi
> > planeerimine, mis merepiiri eriti vist ei puutu?
> >
>  Jaak
> >
> > On 28 May 2018, at 18:00, Raul Kern  wrote:
> >
> > Tere
> >
> > minu arust mere-alad, Võrtsu ja Peipsi ei kuulu maakondade alla.
> > vt näit
> >
> > https://geoportaal.maaamet.ee/est/Andmed-ja-kaardid/Haldus-
> ja-asustusjaotus-p119.html
> >
> >
> > Kuid OSM-i järgi on praegu meri maakonna valduses:
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/350585
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-ee mailing list
> > Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> >
> >
>  ___
>  Talk-ee mailing list
>  Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> >
> >
> >>> ___
> >>> Talk-ee mailing list
> >>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> >
> >
> >>> 

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 29. May 2018, at 20:24, Ivo Reano  wrote:
> 
> In effetti ho già visto che in alcune zone il tag natural=tree è abusato



natural=tree descrive un albero. È vero che non abbiamo mappato ancora molti 
alberi (rispetto a quelli che ci sono in totale), ma non vedo perché non 
mapparli. Sono più permanenti che la maggior parte delle cose che mappiamo ;-)

per alberi monumentali c’è denotation:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:denotation


> ed evidentemente usato solo per "abbellire la mappa".
> E mi sono chiesto se è il caso di lasciare una fila di pioppi che, tra 
> l'altro, sono già stati tagliati...


se sono morti no.

ciao,
Martin ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Ivo Reano]

>
> Non ho guardato il dataset ed eventuali metadati, ma la circonferenza è in
> metri? perchè vedo dalle  mie parti dei boschetti, per cui le piante credo
> siano molte di più.
>

Forse non hai capito che la discussione è sugli alberi monumentali, e gli
alberi sono dichiarati tali solo se hanno alcune caratteristiche, di
longevità o rarità o motivi storici.
Quindi non sono i "boschetti" ad essere monumentali ma alcuni alberi
"notevoli" rispetto a tutti gli altri.

In effetti ho già visto che in alcune zone il tag natural=tree è abusato ed
evidentemente usato solo per "abbellire la mappa".
E mi sono chiesto se è il caso di lasciare una fila di pioppi che, tra
l'altro, sono già stati tagliati...

Sono andato a (ri)guardare la pagina della wiki, che non è tradtta e molto
complessa. Effettivamente sembra che si possa usare su alberi solitari
anche se non significativi.
Io direi che comunque questo tag non vada applicato a raffica, per
abbellire il rendering e basta.
Ma che senso ha segnalare su una mappa degli alberi destinati al taglio?
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[demon.box]

in effetti cercando in rete sembra che la traduzione inglese del "compro oro"
sia 

cash_for_gold

che in effetti esiste in taginfo

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=cash_for_gold

anche se usata solo 2 volte

--enrico




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-es] Enlaces de autopista

[yo paseopor]

Buenas!
Técnicamente un enlace debe taguearse de la siguiente manera (y si no que
alguien me corrija que algo me dejaré)
La vía de enlace debe salir del nodo dónde se indique la última posibilidad
de giro (esto se hace para que el ruteador del GPS no piense que ya nos
hemos equivocado y recalcule ruta en pleno giro, un desastre, vamos), esa
vía debe de ser *_link. Si hablamos de autopista ese nodo se debe marcar
con las siguientes etiquetas:

exit_to=Dirección que vienen indicada en la señal de salida/orientación
highway=motorway_junction
name=En España no tienen nombre diferente al de destino al que llevan, en
muchos otros países de Europa sí, por ello yo prefiero repetir lo que pone
en exit_to a fin de que esa información se pueda encontrar por parte de la
mayoría de ruteadores que la usan.
ref =nº de salida

 Para el caso de la incorporación el proceder es el contrario, la unión
debe de estar en el primer punto dónde ya se pueda incorporar a la vía.
Recordad añadir el ceda al paso en el nodo dónde se vea.

Otros etiquetajes más avanzados te hablarían de las señales y paneles de
orientación y confirmación y yo mismo te hablaría (autobombo) del preset de
Señales de tráfico para JOSM ) pero dicho esto... con lo primero tienes de
sobras ;)

Salut i enllaços
yopaseopor
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

On 29/05/18 19:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


questi dal sito sembra che siano venditori di gioelli di seconda mano
(shop=jewelry, second_hand=only o qualcosa del simile).

Ciao,
Martin




Certo, ma anche oro, gioielli d'oro, orologi d'oro ecc., qesta è la 
fonte pprimaria, poi sicuramente anche altri tipi di gioielli, però 
anch'io non sono mai entrato, per cui non so di preciso come operano.


--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-29 19:08 GMT+02:00 liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu <
liste.gira...@posteo.eu>:

> On 29/05/18 14:59, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>> io ho mappato recentemente uno
>> shop 
>> pawnbroker
>> e
>> name=Compro Oro
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5589028143
>>
>> forse non è il massimo. Devo dire che non sono mai entrato e non sò come
>> operano.
>> Comprano soltanto, oppure fanno da prestatore su pegno?
>>
>
>
> Io per una cosa simile ho mappato così, anche se poco convincente, ma mi
> son basato sul loro sito per le informazioni:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4663505349#map=19/46.05166/11.45831




questi dal sito sembra che siano venditori di gioelli di seconda mano
(shop=jewelry, second_hand=only o qualcosa del simile).

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

On 29/05/18 14:59, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

io ho mappato recentemente uno
shop  pawnbroker
e
name=Compro Oro
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5589028143

forse non è il massimo. Devo dire che non sono mai entrato e non sò come
operano.
Comprano soltanto, oppure fanno da prestatore su pegno?



Io per una cosa simile ho mappato così, anche se poco convincente, ma mi 
son basato sul loro sito per le informazioni:


https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4663505349#map=19/46.05166/11.45831


--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[Andrea Musuruane]

Sì, corretto.

Ciao,

Andrea

Il mar 29 mag 2018, 19:01 Martin Koppenhoefer  ha
scritto:

>
>
> 2018-05-29 17:41 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :
>
>> Pawnbroker non mi sembra appropriato. Non mi risulta che nei "compro oro"
>> ci sia prestito ma solo vendita.
>>
>
>
> intendi acquisto?
>
> Ciao,
> Martin
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

ammetto che avevo le stesse perplessità, anche guardando un sito mi sembra
di una catena Romana di compro oro mi sembra di capire che fanno solo
acquisto di oro e argento.

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-29 17:41 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Pawnbroker non mi sembra appropriato. Non mi risulta che nei "compro oro"
> ci sia prestito ma solo vendita.
>


intendi acquisto?

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Visualizzazione delle tracce caricate

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Ho visto anche in un altro forum che ci sono questi problemi, credo
potrebbe essere un bug (o forse appositamente?) legato alla nuova direttiva
privacy della Comunità Europea.

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] nuovo WMS 2017 Comune di Bologna

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-05-29 16:24 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Palmas :

> E' un piacere annunciarvi che il Comune di Bologna ha esposto il WMS
> http://dati.comune.bologna.it/node/3446 delle ortofoto 2017 a 17cm/px
> utilizzando per la prima volta un addendum ODbL
> http://dati.comune.bologna.it/node/3449 che applicato alla CC BY 4.0
> permette in maniera molto semplice di rendere i dati pubblicati compatibili
> con OSM.
>
> Un grosso ringraziamento a Monica Palmirani di CIRSFID-Università di
> Bologna per la straordinaria consulenza.
> Grazie al buon Lorenzo Perone (che ha tenuto le fila di un discorso
> partito a Salerno durante ASITA2017 stalkerando assieme al sottoscritto il
> povero Gabriele Ciasullo:-) ).
> Grazie al Comune di Bologna che è sempre attento e disponibile alla
> condivisione di idee, dati e progetti
>
> Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT



Ottimo, complimenti a tutti!

Ho inserito il TMS in JOSM:
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/mapsview?entry=Bologna%20ortofoto%202017
Controllate l'attribuzione, il sito non era molto specifico, o forse non ho
trovato la pagina giusta.

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-ee] maakonna piirid ja mere-alad

[Jaak Laineste]

Ma saan aru, et kogu riigi territoorium on ilusti jagatud omavalitsuste vahel 
ära, ja ei vee ega maa territooriumi saa olla, mis omavalitsemata oleks; või 
mitme alla jääks. Selle kohta peaks mingi seadus või määrus olema konkreetselt 
ka, aga kes seda leida oskab :)

See, kellele maa kuulub või kas üldse kellelegi kuulub on täiesti omaette 
küsimus, vesi valdavalt on riigi oma jah, kuigi on ka erakrunte mis mõned 
meetrid merd enda alla hammustavad igasugu veidratel põhjustel. Seda 
omandiprobleemi me siin ei lahenda. “Kuulumine” on ses mõttes halb mõiste, et 
võib tähendada omandit kui haldusjaotust.

Jaak

> On 29 May 2018, at 19:04, Raul Kern  wrote:
> 
> Samas Veeseaduse (https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/VeeS) järgi kuuluvad
> sisemeri ja territoriaalmeri riigile.
> 
> --
> Raul
> Kontakt Mihkel Oviir () kirjutas kuupäeval T, 29.
> mai 2018 kell 18:16:
> 
>> Jaak, need ongi maa-ametist shp-failina alla laetud.
> 
>> 29. mai 2018 16:35 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :
> 
>>> Äge! Ühesõnaga, vesi on meil omavalitsetud, järelikult ka maakondades.
> Et see nüüd korralikult sisse viia, tuleks tehniliselt vist puhas kõikide
> kustutus+import teha... Aga sisse viia ilmselt tuleks, kuigi sellel on ka
> mitmeid miinuseid, nagu nimede paigutus (võib pakkumisi teha, kuhu Tallinna
> nimi uue tsentroidiga läheb), pindala arvutus (aga geoinformaatik teeb
> lihtsalt maa maski) jms.
> 
>>> Eelduseks on korralikult vektoris nende kättesaamine mõistagi. Äkki on
> neil siis nüüd need nii kindlalt paigas, kui avalikult näidata julevad,
> siis tulevad shaped ka sellised?
> 
>>> Jaak
> 
> 
>>> On 29 May 2018, at 15:29, Mihkel Oviir  wrote:
> 
>>> Kusjuures, just hiljuti hakkas maa-amet jagama omavalitsuste kaardikihti
> mille piirid on nn välispiirini.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 29. mai 2018 14:42 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :
> 
 Tere,
> 
 Mõni aasta tagasi võtsin Maaametisse kõne sel teemal. Nendel
> shapefailidel ei ole tõesti maakondi meres, samas hoolikalt vaadates online
> kaarti võis tuvastada, et laiud jms jäävad mingi maakonna sisse küll.
> Vastus oli umbes selline, et põhimõtteliselt on jagatud meri maakondade
> vahel ära küll, aga piiride detailides on piisavalt palju ebamäärasusi, et
> avalikult jagataval kaardil nad seda näidata ei julge, tuleb veel mingeid
> jamasid või pretensioone kellelgi. Samas, kui õigesti mäletan, siis
> omavalitsustele merealasid ikkagi ei jagata, ainult kuiva maad. Mis vahel
> on päris huvitav, nt Keila linnal olid mingid laiud teistpool Pakri saari
> vist.
> 
 Pärast viimast haldusreformi on jälle mõned maakonnapiirid muutunud
> (Pärnu-Läänemaa piir mere osas vist küll ainsana), ja maakonna enda
> tähenduski hajunud. On sel üldse muud tähtsust kui tasuta ühistranspordi
> planeerimine, mis merepiiri eriti vist ei puutu?
> 
 Jaak
> 
> On 28 May 2018, at 18:00, Raul Kern  wrote:
> 
> Tere
> 
> minu arust mere-alad, Võrtsu ja Peipsi ei kuulu maakondade alla.
> vt näit
> 
> https://geoportaal.maaamet.ee/est/Andmed-ja-kaardid/Haldus-ja-asustusjaotus-p119.html
> 
> 
> Kuid OSM-i järgi on praegu meri maakonna valduses:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/350585
> 
> --
> Raul
> 
> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> 
> 
 ___
 Talk-ee mailing list
 Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> 
> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-ee mailing list
>>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> 
> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-ee mailing list
>>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> 
> 
>> ___
>> Talk-ee mailing list
>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> 
> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee


___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

On 29/05/18 14:53, Cascafico Giovanni wrote:

Grazie del link e grazie ad Andrea Borruso per la pulizia in casa
ministeriale ;-)

Ho ulteriormente smagrito il csv nazionale e fatto una umap [1] con sfondo
Mapbox... le coordinate sembrano molto buone

[1] https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/alberi-monumentali_223255




Non ho guardato il dataset ed eventuali metadati, ma la circonferenza è 
in metri? perchè vedo dalle  mie parti dei boschetti, per cui le piante 
credo siano molte di più.




--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Visualizzazione delle tracce caricate

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

On 29/05/18 14:33, Loris Aguzzoli wrote:

Buongiorno, ho un problema nella visualizzazione delle tracce in .gpx che ho 
caricato in OpenStreetMap.Prima spuntando la voce “Tracciati GPS pubblici” 
comparivano adesso no.
Il file mi viene comunicato che è stato caricato con successo.  Qualcuno mi sa 
dire come posso risolvere il problema.  Ringrazio in anticipo per la 
collaborazione.
Buona giornata
Loris



Comparivano dove? nel tuo profilo nell'apposita voce "Tracciati", oppure 
sulla mappa principale spuntando l'apposita voce nella sezione dei 
rendering?





--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [talk-au] Small culverts/bridges in bushland

[Jonathon Rossi]

I finally got a response on the changeset, thanks for the pointer Warin.
The response unfortunately isn't the clearest explanation of why fords were
added when a ground survey wasn't performed since you can rarely see
culverts from aerial imagery.

> I have only ever mapped what is on the ground. There's always some way
for a path the cross a stream - ford, culvert, bridge etc. It just seems a
bit trivial when you have a path crossing a mapped stream that is so small
you can jump across it.

@Ian @Warin I definitely don't want to start edit wars which is why I'm
here, and I do see how mapping a culvert/bridge as a node on the respective
way is problematic because it isn't at the intersection/overlapping of both
ways. Glad to hear you too Ian have run into this exact problem with
somewhat trivial culverts/bridges, exactly as you said that are small
enough you could jump over. I thought others would have weighed in with
their opinion, so in lieu of that, I think I'll just start mapping all
culverts by splitting waterways but only split highways (to reduce
mismatching tag pain) for more significant bridges (maybe anything you
couldn't jump across) unless I'm removing an erroneously mapped ford (and
I'll reconsider).

Thanks

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:25 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 23/05/18 00:56, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Lately a mapper has been adding heaps of fords in SE QLD bushland along
> with more creeks/streams, however I've noticed quite a lot of the fords
> aren't actually fords based on my local knowledge of the area. I tried
> commenting on a changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.
> org/changeset/58540304) 2 weeks ago and again a week ago without a
> response, they have been active in that time and appear to be a long time
> contributor, but I'm now at a loss on how to contact them.
>
> Request a 0 hour block from the Data Working Group ...
> This stops further edits until they acknowledge the problem.
>
> My question isn't about what they've been doing, but about the fact I've
> not wanted to split ways and try to line up a tiny culvert or bridge when
> they are physically so small, however because they haven't been mapped
> someone is now incorrectly added fords. Many of the culverts are just a
> small pipe (sometimes as small as 20mm diameter and 0.5m long) with dirt
> over it to keep the trail dry (the trail is usually built up a little in
> the low lying area), and many of the bridges are only a metre long timber
> bridge especially those added for MTB.
>
> The wiki states that bridge=* and tunnel=* should not be used on nodes, so
> I've not used them and in the past only mapped fords (many which have big
> sized gravel or stepping stones) and obviously use a shared node.
>
> I've read a bunch of discussion on this topic and agree that splitting
> ways to model these is overkill as the tags on each way can get out of sync
> and get in the way, but removing the incorrect fords and not putting
> something in their place irks me. The wiki's comment about a ford: "You are
> both on the highway and in the waterway, and not separated logically as a
> stream under a bridge would be" makes complete sense, and I don't want
> shared nodes for these cases even though many streams are intermittent.
>
> Finally my question, why couldn't we map a culvert as a node of a
> waterway, or a bridge as a node of a highway? The only other option I can
> think of is to add a note to a node of highway/waterway describing what is
> there so someone doesn't add a ford.
>
>
> OSM rules - anything you like...
> So you could map them as nodes... but other mappers could remove them.
> Edit wars.
>
> A culvert should be on the crossing of water and a path/road.
>
> I also have concerns that another mapper has added water crossing details
> ... base on nothing other than the presence in OSM of a crossing .. the
> details are not viewable in imagery.
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-ee] maakonna piirid ja mere-alad

[Raul Kern]

Samas Veeseaduse (https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/VeeS) järgi kuuluvad
sisemeri ja territoriaalmeri riigile.

--
Raul
Kontakt Mihkel Oviir () kirjutas kuupäeval T, 29.
mai 2018 kell 18:16:

> Jaak, need ongi maa-ametist shp-failina alla laetud.

> 29. mai 2018 16:35 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :

>> Äge! Ühesõnaga, vesi on meil omavalitsetud, järelikult ka maakondades.
Et see nüüd korralikult sisse viia, tuleks tehniliselt vist puhas kõikide
kustutus+import teha... Aga sisse viia ilmselt tuleks, kuigi sellel on ka
mitmeid miinuseid, nagu nimede paigutus (võib pakkumisi teha, kuhu Tallinna
nimi uue tsentroidiga läheb), pindala arvutus (aga geoinformaatik teeb
lihtsalt maa maski) jms.

>> Eelduseks on korralikult vektoris nende kättesaamine mõistagi. Äkki on
neil siis nüüd need nii kindlalt paigas, kui avalikult näidata julevad,
siis tulevad shaped ka sellised?

>> Jaak


>> On 29 May 2018, at 15:29, Mihkel Oviir  wrote:

>> Kusjuures, just hiljuti hakkas maa-amet jagama omavalitsuste kaardikihti
mille piirid on nn välispiirini.

>> 

>> 29. mai 2018 14:42 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :

>>> Tere,

>>> Mõni aasta tagasi võtsin Maaametisse kõne sel teemal. Nendel
shapefailidel ei ole tõesti maakondi meres, samas hoolikalt vaadates online
kaarti võis tuvastada, et laiud jms jäävad mingi maakonna sisse küll.
Vastus oli umbes selline, et põhimõtteliselt on jagatud meri maakondade
vahel ära küll, aga piiride detailides on piisavalt palju ebamäärasusi, et
avalikult jagataval kaardil nad seda näidata ei julge, tuleb veel mingeid
jamasid või pretensioone kellelgi. Samas, kui õigesti mäletan, siis
omavalitsustele merealasid ikkagi ei jagata, ainult kuiva maad. Mis vahel
on päris huvitav, nt Keila linnal olid mingid laiud teistpool Pakri saari
vist.

>>> Pärast viimast haldusreformi on jälle mõned maakonnapiirid muutunud
(Pärnu-Läänemaa piir mere osas vist küll ainsana), ja maakonna enda
tähenduski hajunud. On sel üldse muud tähtsust kui tasuta ühistranspordi
planeerimine, mis merepiiri eriti vist ei puutu?

>>> Jaak

>>> > On 28 May 2018, at 18:00, Raul Kern  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Tere
>>> >
>>> > minu arust mere-alad, Võrtsu ja Peipsi ei kuulu maakondade alla.
>>> > vt näit
>>> >
https://geoportaal.maaamet.ee/est/Andmed-ja-kaardid/Haldus-ja-asustusjaotus-p119.html
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Kuid OSM-i järgi on praegu meri maakonna valduses:
>>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/350585
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Raul
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > Talk-ee mailing list
>>> > Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee


>>> ___
>>> Talk-ee mailing list
>>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee


>> ___
>> Talk-ee mailing list
>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee


>> ___
>> Talk-ee mailing list
>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee


> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[Andrea Musuruane]

Pawnbroker non mi sembra appropriato. Non mi risulta che nei "compro oro"
ci sia prestito ma solo vendita.

Ciao,

Andrea


Il mar 29 mag 2018, 15:00 Martin Koppenhoefer  ha
scritto:

> io ho mappato recentemente uno
> shop 
> pawnbroker
> e
> name=Compro Oro
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5589028143
>
> forse non è il massimo. Devo dire che non sono mai entrato e non sò come
> operano.
> Comprano soltanto, oppure fanno da prestatore su pegno?
>
> Ciao,
> Martin
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[SK53]

Dont forget the amenity=bicycle_parking usage (mentioned in the wiki) where
the semantics are different from those you describe.12200+ examples in
England.

Probably the more usual way of mapping a platform canopy is with
building=roof or building=canopy with possibly wall=no.

Jerry



On 29 May 2018 at 15:48, Dan S  wrote:

> > On 29/05/18 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:
> >>
> >> At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I
> know
> >> to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.
> >
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the issue seems to be that the
> carto change works on the assumption that covered=yes implies the
> feature isn't visible (e.g. because partly underground), whereas
> others may be are working on the assumption that covered=yes means you
> won't get rained on (e.g. there is some kind of roof)?
>
> The wiki seems pretty clear actually - it only really talks about the
> first of the two meanings.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:covered
> I'm not aware of any "UK-local" consensus to be different about that.
>
> I personally haven't use the "covered" tag (no reason), but I do add
> building=roof objects to some train stations.
>
> Dan
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[demon.box]

ottimo grazie ;-)

--enrico




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[OSM-ja] ２つのwayがぴったり重なっている？

[kkondo]

こんにちは。
甲賀PAと甲賀土山ICとの間の新名神高速道路について、ところどころ２つのwayがぴったり重なっているようです（それとも私の誤解？）。
この辺りの場所です： https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/34.9126/136.1968

___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-ee] maakonna piirid ja mere-alad

[Mihkel Oviir]

Jaak, need ongi maa-ametist shp-failina alla laetud.

29. mai 2018 16:35 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :

> Äge! Ühesõnaga, vesi on meil omavalitsetud, järelikult ka maakondades. Et
> see nüüd korralikult sisse viia, tuleks tehniliselt vist puhas kõikide
> kustutus+import teha... Aga sisse viia ilmselt tuleks, kuigi sellel on ka
> mitmeid miinuseid, nagu nimede paigutus (võib pakkumisi teha, kuhu Tallinna
> nimi uue tsentroidiga läheb), pindala arvutus (aga geoinformaatik teeb
> lihtsalt maa maski) jms.
>
> Eelduseks on korralikult vektoris nende kättesaamine mõistagi. Äkki on
> neil siis nüüd need nii kindlalt paigas, kui avalikult näidata julevad,
> siis tulevad shaped ka sellised?
>
> Jaak
>
>
> On 29 May 2018, at 15:29, Mihkel Oviir  wrote:
>
> Kusjuures, just hiljuti hakkas maa-amet jagama omavalitsuste kaardikihti
> mille piirid on nn välispiirini.
>
> 
>
> 29. mai 2018 14:42 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :
>
>> Tere,
>>
>> Mõni aasta tagasi võtsin Maaametisse kõne sel teemal. Nendel
>> shapefailidel ei ole tõesti maakondi meres, samas hoolikalt vaadates online
>> kaarti võis tuvastada, et laiud jms jäävad mingi maakonna sisse küll.
>> Vastus oli umbes selline, et põhimõtteliselt on jagatud meri maakondade
>> vahel ära küll, aga piiride detailides on piisavalt palju ebamäärasusi, et
>> avalikult jagataval kaardil nad seda näidata ei julge, tuleb veel mingeid
>> jamasid või pretensioone kellelgi. Samas, kui õigesti mäletan, siis
>> omavalitsustele merealasid ikkagi ei jagata, ainult kuiva maad. Mis vahel
>> on päris huvitav, nt Keila linnal olid mingid laiud teistpool Pakri saari
>> vist.
>>
>> Pärast viimast haldusreformi on jälle mõned maakonnapiirid muutunud
>> (Pärnu-Läänemaa piir mere osas vist küll ainsana), ja maakonna enda
>> tähenduski hajunud. On sel üldse muud tähtsust kui tasuta ühistranspordi
>> planeerimine, mis merepiiri eriti vist ei puutu?
>>
>> Jaak
>>
>> > On 28 May 2018, at 18:00, Raul Kern  wrote:
>> >
>> > Tere
>> >
>> > minu arust mere-alad, Võrtsu ja Peipsi ei kuulu maakondade alla.
>> > vt näit
>> > https://geoportaal.maaamet.ee/est/Andmed-ja-kaardid/Haldus-j
>> a-asustusjaotus-p119.html
>> >
>> >
>> > Kuid OSM-i järgi on praegu meri maakonna valduses:
>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/350585
>> >
>> > --
>> > Raul
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Talk-ee mailing list
>> > Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ee mailing list
>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
>
>
___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Dave F]

I think Carto & anyone who added it to underground metro stations have 
misinterpreted the 'covered' tag.


As it's not the whole length of the platform, you could add a 
building=roof polygon.


Shelters, bins, benches etc are better mapped as individual nodes at 
their locations, rather than adding them as sub-tags to the platform.


Cheers
DaveF

On 29/05/2018 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:


Guys

Recently changed Chorley station adding more details. Added 
covered=yes cos there is a canopy for us to huddle under but not the 
whole length of the platform, there are also bus shelter type of 
shelters so shelter=yes was also added.


Checked that my changes had rendered ok but found to my horror that 
the platforms had disappeared. Investigations showed -


https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kocio/diary -


OpenStreetMap Carto release v4.11.0


Posted bykocio on 11 May 
2018 inEnglish (Englis h) 



  * Hiding railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and
covered=yes

Have changed Chorley to delete covered tag - expect the render to show 
as expected for the surface.
A quick overpass  (inexpertly done) shows the following railway 
stations may be affected adversely -

Holyhead
Manchester Airport
Salford Quays - Anchorage
Manchester Piccadilly
Harrogate
Hull
Sleaford
Bury St Edmunds
Guildford
Bracknell
Westbury
and many in London and there are others

I know we shouldn't map to the render but the meaning of covered seems 
to vary globally.   I know that

Manchester Airport
Salford Quays - Anchorage
Manchester Piccadilly
Harrogate
Guildford
Bracknell
Westbury
are all similar to Chorley - I've visited or passed through them; 
Manchester Piccadilly  I know well and the solitary (covered=yes) 
platform 12 is the same as the other 11 platforms - mostly under the 
glass train shed.
In my mind accurate representation of platform location is so 
important when travelling.


At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I 
know to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.


Looking at Manchester Piccadilly I can see that there are many 
opportunities to improve the data and thus the representation, anyone 
fancy a mapping party there?


Regards
Tony  - TonyS999









___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Dan S]

> On 29/05/18 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:
>>
>> At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I know
>> to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.
>

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the issue seems to be that the
carto change works on the assumption that covered=yes implies the
feature isn't visible (e.g. because partly underground), whereas
others may be are working on the assumption that covered=yes means you
won't get rained on (e.g. there is some kind of roof)?

The wiki seems pretty clear actually - it only really talks about the
first of the two meanings.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:covered
I'm not aware of any "UK-local" consensus to be different about that.

I personally haven't use the "covered" tag (no reason), but I do add
building=roof objects to some train stations.

Dan

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Mark Goodge]

On 29/05/2018 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:

Guys

Recently changed Chorley station adding more details. Added covered=yes 
cos there is a canopy for us to huddle under but not the whole length of 
the platform, there are also bus shelter type of shelters so shelter=yes 
was also added.


I think 'covered' is the wrong tag, in this context. According to the 
wiki, it doesn't simply mean something that has a roof (or canopy), it 
means something that is underneath something else.


From my understanding of it, a more correct use of this in a railway 
context would be at somewhere like, say, St Pancras, where you would map 
the building as a whole and then map the platforms underneath the train 
shed as "covered". But I think it's complicated anyway, as even where 
there is a separate train shed, it doesn't usually cover the entire 
length of all of the platforms. (And I note that St Pancras doesn't 
actually have the platforms tagged as "covered", anyway).


At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I 
know to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.


I think removing it would be correct, too.

Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk] OSM Rendering Server

[Komяpa]

Hi,

Since September 2016 I've been sponsoring a rendering server for OSM tiles
called `vial` out of personal finance. It is set up on Hetzner. This month
Belarus tax regulations changed, and Hetzner starts charging 20% more from
Belarus residents.

If somebody is willing to take the flag of sponsoring this machine, drop me
a line and I'll transfer server to your account. I'll stop it in July
otherwise. Monthly fee is 144.2 EUR now.

If you're willing to set up another server (cheaper or on bigger hardware)
side by side, have a look at Hetzner's Server Bidding - you can find
similar machines, without setup fee. Try getting smaller machine with
SSD+HDD and setting SSD as caching device for HDD - it's going to get
better performance than current Vial's setup (which spends lots of time
waiting for HDD).

More on how to provide a server for OSM:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Servers/Tile_CDN

Thanks.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Andy Townsend]

On 29/05/2018 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:


Checked that my changes had rendered ok but found to my horror that 
the platforms had disappeared. Investigations showed -


https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kocio/diary -


OpenStreetMap Carto release v4.11.0


Posted bykocio on 11 May 
2018 inEnglish (Englis h) 



  * Hiding railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and
covered=yes



Personally I think that's an error on their part (although it's their* 
style not mine etc. etc.).  The relevant issue is 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3162 and no one 
said "it's a silly idea" so it's difficult to criticise the person who's 
idea it was going forward on that basis.


Have changed Chorley to delete covered tag - expect the render to show 
as expected for the surface.


If it was me I wouldn't change the tagging just to match one particular 
renderer - someone might come along and do something useful with the tag 
later, but they can only do that if the data's there.  Personally I've 
tended to do partially-covered station platforms as "building=roof" (if 
I've even remembered to do that) but I might be in a minority of 1 there.


In the meantime I'm sure that there are lots of maps that show covered 
railway platforms - I know that 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=18=53.653154=-2.626704 
does.




Looking at Manchester Piccadilly I can see that there are many 
opportunities to improve the data and thus the representation, anyone 
fancy a mapping party there?
I'm sure that you'd get a few takers for that - might be worth trying to 
contact the group that organised the "Joy Diversion" the other week and 
see if you can invite attendees to that along.


Best Regards,

Andy

* the people who put the hard graft into designing and developing the 
style are naturally the people who get most influence over how it looks.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[David Woolley]

On 29/05/18 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:
At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I 
know to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.


I disagree; it is tagging for the renderer.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-it] nuovo WMS 2017 Comune di Bologna

[Alessandro Palmas]

E' un piacere annunciarvi che il Comune di Bologna ha esposto il WMS 
http://dati.comune.bologna.it/node/3446 delle ortofoto 2017 a 17cm/px 
utilizzando per la prima volta un addendum ODbL 
http://dati.comune.bologna.it/node/3449 che applicato alla CC BY 4.0 
permette in maniera molto semplice di rendere i dati pubblicati 
compatibili con OSM.


Un grosso ringraziamento a Monica Palmirani di CIRSFID-Università di 
Bologna per la straordinaria consulenza.
Grazie al buon Lorenzo Perone (che ha tenuto le fila di un discorso 
partito a Salerno durante ASITA2017 stalkerando assieme al sottoscritto 
il povero Gabriele Ciasullo:-) ).
Grazie al Comune di Bologna che è sempre attento e disponibile alla 
condivisione di idee, dati e progetti


Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty

[Jan Sten Adámek]

V ID je to označit bod, Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V a umístit nový bod. A pak je potřeba 
přidat nový bod do relací tras a smazat všechny tagy a relace u původního bodu.


Sten
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty

[Marián Kyral]

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Martin Ždila 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 29. 5. 2018 16:00:27
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty
"
Do JOSM po pridani pluginu UtilsPlugin2 pribudne funkcia Extract Node ktora
to spravi po oznaceni uzla automaticky. Ak povodny uzol bol v relacii, bude
aj novy uzol. Ak nie, zislo by sa ho pridat do prisluchajucich relacii
rucne.



https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/UtilsPlugin2
(https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/UtilsPlugin2)





"



Kurnik. Já to celou dobu dělám ručně a ona je na to taková krásná funkce.
Jak jsem ji jen mohl přehlédnout? :-(




Díky,


Marián






"


On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:52 PM Václav Kroupar mailto:vkv...@post.cz)> wrote:

"

U Luční boudy v Krkonoších je rozcestník https://openstreetmap.cz/#map=18/
50.73449/15.69763=kB
(https://openstreetmap.cz/#map=18/50.73449/15.69763=kB) Fyzicky je
cca 30 m na jihovýchod od zakreslené polohy (viz nahrané fotky).

Chtěl jsem ho přesunout, ale bohužel je součástí křížení cest. Jak to
udělat, abych nenapáchal více škody než užitku? Napadlo mě založit nový bod
a k němu doplnit všechny atributy z křížení. Tam je zrušit. Ale opravdu si
tím nejsem jist.

Díky za radu Vašek

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org(mailto:Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org)
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz)
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



--
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)Ing. Martin Ždila
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/*Martin*)

OZ Freemap Slovakia


tel:+421-908-363-848
mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk(mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk)
http://www.freemap.sk/(http://www.freemap.sk)





 

"
 ___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty

[Václav Kroupar]

Prosím o návod do ID.

JOSM jsem viděl na školení, vím, že toho umí hafo, ale ovládání je takové
zvláštní. Na mé drobnosti vždy ID stačil.

Díky Vašek
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Martin Ždila 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 29. 5. 2018 16:00:26
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty
"
Do JOSM po pridani pluginu UtilsPlugin2 pribudne funkcia Extract Node ktora
to spravi po oznaceni uzla automaticky. Ak povodny uzol bol v relacii, bude
aj novy uzol. Ak nie, zislo by sa ho pridat do prisluchajucich relacii
rucne.



https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/UtilsPlugin2
(https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/UtilsPlugin2)








On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:52 PM Václav Kroupar mailto:vkv...@post.cz)> wrote:

"

U Luční boudy v Krkonoších je rozcestník https://openstreetmap.cz/#map=18/
50.73449/15.69763=kB
(https://openstreetmap.cz/#map=18/50.73449/15.69763=kB) Fyzicky je
cca 30 m na jihovýchod od zakreslené polohy (viz nahrané fotky).

Chtěl jsem ho přesunout, ale bohužel je součástí křížení cest. Jak to
udělat, abych nenapáchal více škody než užitku? Napadlo mě založit nový bod
a k němu doplnit všechny atributy z křížení. Tam je zrušit. Ale opravdu si
tím nejsem jist.

Díky za radu Vašek

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org(mailto:Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org)
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz)
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



--
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)
(https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz)Ing. Martin Ždila
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/*Martin*)

OZ Freemap Slovakia


tel:+421-908-363-848
mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk(mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk)
http://www.freemap.sk/(http://www.freemap.sk)





 

"
 ___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty

[Martin Ždila]

Do JOSM po pridani pluginu UtilsPlugin2 pribudne funkcia Extract Node ktora
to spravi po oznaceni uzla automaticky. Ak povodny uzol bol v relacii, bude
aj novy uzol. Ak nie, zislo by sa ho pridat do prisluchajucich relacii
rucne.

https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/UtilsPlugin2


On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:52 PM Václav Kroupar  wrote:

> U Luční boudy v Krkonoších je rozcestník
> https://openstreetmap.cz/#map=18/50.73449/15.69763=kB Fyzicky je
> cca 30 m na jihovýchod od zakreslené polohy (viz nahrané fotky).
> Chtěl jsem ho přesunout, ale bohužel je součástí křížení cest. Jak to
> udělat, abych nenapáchal více škody než užitku? Napadlo mě založit nový bod
> a k němu doplnit všechny atributy z křížení. Tam je zrušit. Ale opravdu si
> tím nejsem jist.
> Díky za radu Vašek
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> --
> Ing. Martin Ždila 
> OZ Freemap Slovakia
> tel:+421-908-363-848
> mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk
> http://www.freemap.sk/
>
>
> 
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Tony Shield]

Guys

Recently changed Chorley station adding more details. Added covered=yes 
cos there is a canopy for us to huddle under but not the whole length of 
the platform, there are also bus shelter type of shelters so shelter=yes 
was also added.


Checked that my changes had rendered ok but found to my horror that the 
platforms had disappeared. Investigations showed -


https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kocio/diary -


   OpenStreetMap Carto release v4.11.0
   

Posted bykocio on 11 May 2018 
inEnglish (Englis h) 



 * Hiding railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and
   covered=yes

Have changed Chorley to delete covered tag - expect the render to show 
as expected for the surface.
A quick overpass  (inexpertly done) shows the following railway stations 
may be affected adversely -

Holyhead
Manchester Airport
Salford Quays - Anchorage
Manchester Piccadilly
Harrogate
Hull
Sleaford
Bury St Edmunds
Guildford
Bracknell
Westbury
and many in London and there are others

I know we shouldn't map to the render but the meaning of covered seems 
to vary globally.   I know that

Manchester Airport
Salford Quays - Anchorage
Manchester Piccadilly
Harrogate
Guildford
Bracknell
Westbury
are all similar to Chorley - I've visited or passed through them; 
Manchester Piccadilly  I know well and the solitary (covered=yes) 
platform 12 is the same as the other 11 platforms - mostly under the 
glass train shed.
In my mind accurate representation of platform location is so important 
when travelling.


At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I 
know to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.


Looking at Manchester Piccadilly I can see that there are many 
opportunities to improve the data and thus the representation, anyone 
fancy a mapping party there?


Regards
Tony  - TonyS999







___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-cz] Přesun rozcestníku, který je součástí cesty

[Václav Kroupar]

U Luční boudy v Krkonoších je rozcestník https://openstreetmap.cz/#map=18/
50.73449/15.69763=kB Fyzicky je cca 30 m na jihovýchod od zakreslené
polohy (viz nahrané fotky).

Chtěl jsem ho přesunout, ale bohužel je součástí křížení cest. Jak to
udělat, abych nenapáchal více škody než užitku? Napadlo mě založit nový bod
a k němu doplnit všechny atributy z křížení. Tam je zrušit. Ale opravdu si
tím nejsem jist.

Díky za radu Vašek___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-ee] maakonna piirid ja mere-alad

[Jaak Laineste]

Äge! Ühesõnaga, vesi on meil omavalitsetud, järelikult ka maakondades. Et see 
nüüd korralikult sisse viia, tuleks tehniliselt vist puhas kõikide 
kustutus+import teha... Aga sisse viia ilmselt tuleks, kuigi sellel on ka 
mitmeid miinuseid, nagu nimede paigutus (võib pakkumisi teha, kuhu Tallinna 
nimi uue tsentroidiga läheb), pindala arvutus (aga geoinformaatik teeb lihtsalt 
maa maski) jms. 

Eelduseks on korralikult vektoris nende kättesaamine mõistagi. Äkki on neil 
siis nüüd need nii kindlalt paigas, kui avalikult näidata julevad, siis tulevad 
shaped ka sellised?

Jaak


> On 29 May 2018, at 15:29, Mihkel Oviir  wrote:
> 
> Kusjuures, just hiljuti hakkas maa-amet jagama omavalitsuste kaardikihti 
> mille piirid on nn välispiirini.
>  
> 
> 
> 29. mai 2018 14:42 kirjutas Jaak Laineste :
>> Tere,
>> 
>> Mõni aasta tagasi võtsin Maaametisse kõne sel teemal. Nendel shapefailidel 
>> ei ole tõesti maakondi meres, samas hoolikalt vaadates online kaarti võis 
>> tuvastada, et laiud jms jäävad mingi maakonna sisse küll. Vastus oli umbes 
>> selline, et põhimõtteliselt on jagatud meri maakondade vahel ära küll, aga 
>> piiride detailides on piisavalt palju ebamäärasusi, et avalikult jagataval 
>> kaardil nad seda näidata ei julge, tuleb veel mingeid jamasid või 
>> pretensioone kellelgi. Samas, kui õigesti mäletan, siis omavalitsustele 
>> merealasid ikkagi ei jagata, ainult kuiva maad. Mis vahel on päris huvitav, 
>> nt Keila linnal olid mingid laiud teistpool Pakri saari vist.
>> 
>> Pärast viimast haldusreformi on jälle mõned maakonnapiirid muutunud 
>> (Pärnu-Läänemaa piir mere osas vist küll ainsana), ja maakonna enda 
>> tähenduski hajunud. On sel üldse muud tähtsust kui tasuta ühistranspordi 
>> planeerimine, mis merepiiri eriti vist ei puutu? 
>> 
>> Jaak
>> 
>> > On 28 May 2018, at 18:00, Raul Kern  wrote:
>> > 
>> > Tere
>> > 
>> > minu arust mere-alad, Võrtsu ja Peipsi ei kuulu maakondade alla.
>> > vt näit
>> > https://geoportaal.maaamet.ee/est/Andmed-ja-kaardid/Haldus-ja-asustusjaotus-p119.html
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Kuid OSM-i järgi on praegu meri maakonna valduses:
>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/350585
>> > 
>> > --
>> > Raul
>> > 
>> > ___
>> > Talk-ee mailing list
>> > Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-ee mailing list
>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
> 
> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

io ho mappato recentemente uno
shop  pawnbroker
e
name=Compro Oro
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5589028143

forse non è il massimo. Devo dire che non sono mai entrato e non sò come
operano.
Comprano soltanto, oppure fanno da prestatore su pegno?

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Grazie del link e grazie ad Andrea Borruso per la pulizia in casa
ministeriale ;-)

Ho ulteriormente smagrito il csv nazionale e fatto una umap [1] con sfondo
Mapbox... le coordinate sembrano molto buone

[1] https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/alberi-monumentali_223255

Il giorno 29 maggio 2018 10:22, Federico Leva (Nemo) 
ha scritto:

> Ora dobbiamo solo fare in modo di importarli in Wikidata!
>  monumentali-ditalia-ffd7d0d6d860>
>
> Federico
>
> Federico Leva (Nemo), 20/01/2015 19:38:
>
> Letto ne "La nuova ecologia" di gennaio 2015:
>> * http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2014/11/18/14A08883/sg
>> * http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/canali/energiaeambiente/
>> natura/2014/11/19/realacci-al-via-sanzioni-a-tutela-alberi-m
>> onumentali_32ee22e2-ec7d-4af8-bd6f-6199e546f9b0.html
>> * http://www.corpoforestale.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/I
>> T/IDPagina/6309
>>
>> Entro luglio 2015 dovremmo avere un elenco nazionale di alberi
>> monumentali. Mi pare che ciò risolva il dubbio su quale/i "Wiki Loves"
>> fare, è evidente che non si può perdere questa occasione! ;-)
>>
>> L'articolo 8 prevede un elenco nel sito del corpo forestale, ma il 7
>> parla dei contenuti e dice che a livello regionale è «aperto alla
>> consultazione e/o all'inserimento dei dati da parte  degli  enti
>> territoriali interessati, con abilitazione di funzioni diversificate». Mi
>> sembra quindi che si debbano chiamare gli amici di WWF e Legambiente per
>> convincere il ministero a
>> 1) includere le coordinate geografiche nei dati da fornire;
>> 2) assicurarsi che il tutto sia pubblicato in CC-0 e in un qualche
>> formato machine-readable.
>>
>> Poi andranno tutti inseriti in OSM (cc talk-it).
>>
>> Nemo
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] negozio "compro oro"

[demon.box]

ciao, come taggo il classico negozio "compro oro"?
grazie

--enrico




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Visualizzazione delle tracce caricate

[Loris Aguzzoli]

Buongiorno, ho un problema nella visualizzazione delle tracce in .gpx che ho 
caricato in OpenStreetMap.Prima spuntando la voce “Tracciati GPS pubblici” 
comparivano adesso no.
Il file mi viene comunicato che è stato caricato con successo.  Qualcuno mi sa 
dire come posso risolvere il problema.  Ringrazio in anticipo per la 
collaborazione.
Buona giornata
Loris


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-ee] maakonna piirid ja mere-alad

[Jaak Laineste]

Tere,

Mõni aasta tagasi võtsin Maaametisse kõne sel teemal. Nendel shapefailidel ei 
ole tõesti maakondi meres, samas hoolikalt vaadates online kaarti võis 
tuvastada, et laiud jms jäävad mingi maakonna sisse küll. Vastus oli umbes 
selline, et põhimõtteliselt on jagatud meri maakondade vahel ära küll, aga 
piiride detailides on piisavalt palju ebamäärasusi, et avalikult jagataval 
kaardil nad seda näidata ei julge, tuleb veel mingeid jamasid või pretensioone 
kellelgi. Samas, kui õigesti mäletan, siis omavalitsustele merealasid ikkagi ei 
jagata, ainult kuiva maad. Mis vahel on päris huvitav, nt Keila linnal olid 
mingid laiud teistpool Pakri saari vist.

Pärast viimast haldusreformi on jälle mõned maakonnapiirid muutunud 
(Pärnu-Läänemaa piir mere osas vist küll ainsana), ja maakonna enda tähenduski 
hajunud. On sel üldse muud tähtsust kui tasuta ühistranspordi planeerimine, mis 
merepiiri eriti vist ei puutu? 

Jaak

> On 28 May 2018, at 18:00, Raul Kern  wrote:
> 
> Tere
> 
> minu arust mere-alad, Võrtsu ja Peipsi ei kuulu maakondade alla.
> vt näit
> https://geoportaal.maaamet.ee/est/Andmed-ja-kaardid/Haldus-ja-asustusjaotus-p119.html
> 
> 
> Kuid OSM-i järgi on praegu meri maakonna valduses:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/350585
> 
> --
> Raul
> 
> ___
> Talk-ee mailing list
> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee


___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

[Talk-cz] WeeklyOSM CZ 408

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, je dostupné vydání 408 týdeníku WeeklyOSM:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/cz/archives/10338

* Nepřístupné chodníky.
* Erupce na Havaji.
* Záplavy v Ghaně.
* Tagování (cyklo) pruhů.
* Co je špatně v OSM?
* Pohyby půdy po tězbě.
* GDPR a OpenStreetMap.
* OSM pro Amigu.
* Původní řeky v Evropě.

Pěkné počtení ...

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2018-05-27

[Dave Hansen]

These are based off of Lambertus's work here:

http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl

If you have questions or comments about these maps, please feel
free to ask.  However, please do not send me private mail.  The
odds are, someone else will have the same questions, and by
asking on the talk-us@ list, others can benefit.

Downloads:

http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2018-05-27

Map to visualize what each file contains:


http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2018-05-27/kml/kml.html


FAQ



Why did you do this?

I wrote scripts to joined them myself to lessen the impact
of doing a large join on Lambertus's server.  I've also
cut them in large longitude swaths that should fit conveniently
on removable media.  

http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2018-05-27

Can or should I seed the torrents?

Yes!!  If you use the .torrent files, please seed.  That web
server is in the UK, and it helps to have some peers on this
side of the Atlantic.

Why is my map missing small rectangular areas?

There have been some missing tiles from Lambertus's map (the
red rectangles),  I don't see any at the moment, so you may
want to update if you had issues with the last set.

Why can I not copy the large files to my new SD card?

If you buy a new card (especially SDHC), some are FAT16 from
the factory.  I had to reformat it to let me create a >2GB
file.

Does your map cover Mexico/Canada?

Yes!!  I have, for the purposes of this map, annexed Ontario
in to the USA.  Some areas of North America that are close
to the US also just happen to get pulled in to these maps.
This might not happen forever, and if you would like your
non-US area to get included, let me know. 

-- Dave


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-it] alberi monumentali

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Mi rispondo da solo: nel dataset del Ministero non c'è la (virtuosa)
provinca di Pistoia, che ha già pubblicato in open data.

Il giorno 26 maggio 2018 21:20, Cascafico Giovanni  ha
scritto:

> Per la provincia di Pistoia avevo usato questo tagging
> http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/it/map/open-data-pistoia_
> 174967#10/43.9755/10.9053
>
> Una curiosità: puoi vedere se le coordinate del dataset nazionale hanno
> per Pistoia lo stesso errore?
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[OSM-ja] [大坂/京都]もくもく会とマッピングパーティのお知らせ

[K.Sakanoshita]

坂ノ下です。

6月は以下のイベントを開きます。ぜひ、ご参加ください。

OpenStreetMapは、みんなで描いて成長させる地図だと思います。

「好きなので発展して欲しいけど、地図は描いたこと無い」って方達、
結構居られます。マッピングパーティって、常連による常連のための
イベントでは無く、初心者が経験を積むイベントを目指しています。

6/13(水) [もくもくマッピング！ #18]
https://countries-romantic.connpass.com/event/88936/

6/23(土) [幕末京都マッピングパーティ#05：会津藩と京都守護職]
https://countries-romantic.connpass.com/event/88121/

そういった訳で、「初心者だから敷居が高い」とか考えず、お気楽に
イベントにご参加くださいね。お申込みをお待ちしております！

それでは。

--
/*
 * K.Sakanoshita (http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~saka/)
 * (Phone) barsa...@gmail.com / (PC) s...@netfort.gr.jp
 */

___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Volker Schmidt]

Il problema è che tanti non sono reali e tanti reali non sono nella mappa.
I data set utilizzati nel Veneto erano di bassisima qualità. Poi, anche se
fossero reali, chi mantiene i dati
Questo zona [1} contiene più di 90k alberi.
Noi in Italia siamo forse 200 (sparo una cifra) mappatori attivi. Chi
mantiene questa mole di dati?

Ho fatto una piccola controllatina su Lodi. La densità di alberi è simile,
la qualità dei dati, facendo confronti a caso con foto Mapbox Satellite, è
migliore, ma la quota errori, in particolare alberi mancanti, rimane enorme.

Nella zona Padova i dati sono sono decorazione della mappa, non sono alberi
veri.

(non parlo di alberi monumentali!)

[1] https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/za5

On Tue, 29 May 2018, 10:24 Federico Leva (Nemo),  wrote:

> Ora dobbiamo solo fare in modo di importarli in Wikidata!
>  ffd7d0d6d860>
>
> Federico
>
> Federico Leva (Nemo), 20/01/2015 19:38:
> > Letto ne "La nuova ecologia" di gennaio 2015:
> > * http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2014/11/18/14A08883/sg
> > *
> > http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/canali/energiaeambiente/natura/2014/
> 11/19/realacci-al-via-sanzioni-a-tutela-alberi-monumentali_32ee22e2-ec7d-
> 4af8-bd6f-6199e546f9b0.html
> >
> > *
> > http://www.corpoforestale.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/
> IT/IDPagina/6309
> >
> > Entro luglio 2015 dovremmo avere un elenco nazionale di alberi
> > monumentali. Mi pare che ciò risolva il dubbio su quale/i "Wiki Loves"
> > fare, è evidente che non si può perdere questa occasione! ;-)
> >
> > L'articolo 8 prevede un elenco nel sito del corpo forestale, ma il 7
> > parla dei contenuti e dice che a livello regionale è «aperto alla
> > consultazione e/o all'inserimento dei dati da parte  degli  enti
> > territoriali interessati, con abilitazione di funzioni diversificate».
> > Mi sembra quindi che si debbano chiamare gli amici di WWF e Legambiente
> > per convincere il ministero a
> > 1) includere le coordinate geografiche nei dati da fornire;
> > 2) assicurarsi che il tutto sia pubblicato in CC-0 e in un qualche
> > formato machine-readable.
> >
> > Poi andranno tutti inseriti in OSM (cc talk-it).
> >
> > Nemo
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[andy]

Buongiorno,
io ho fatto una richiesta personale e ho da poco anche segnalato la cosa a
Team/AgID
https://forum.italia.it/t/la-licenza-della-banca-dati-del-ministero-delle-politiche-agricole-alimentari-e-forestali/3464

Saluti,

a

-- 
___

Andrea Borruso
website: https://medium.com/tantotanto
38° 7' 48" N, 13° 21' 9" E, EPSG:4326
___

"cercare e saper riconoscere chi e cosa,
 in mezzo all’inferno, non è inferno,
e farlo durare, e dargli spazio"

Italo Calvino
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Maurizio Napolitano, 29/05/2018 11:37:

Ora dobbiamo solo fare in modo di importarli in Wikidata!


Come scrivevo sulla ML di Spaghetti Open Data e come conclude
l'articolo anche Andrea Borruso: c'è un problema di licenza.


Sí certo, ergo quel "fare in modo di" e non semplicemente "correre 
immediatamente a".


Federico

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Maurizio Napolitano]

Come scrivevo sulla ML di Spaghetti Open Data e come conclude
l'articolo anche Andrea Borruso: c'è un problema di licenza.
Quindi, per importarli in Wikidata, sarebbe il caso di chiedere il permesso.
Non credo sia un problema perchè la volontà è chiaramente quella.
Rimane il fatto che la pagina del ministero delle politiche agricole
(che non è il MIBACT) non ha una policy chiara sui dati che divulga.
Inoltre non va dimenticato che Wikidata redistribuisce in CC0.

Ora, la discussione può essere molto ampia, e - forse - questo caso
potrebbe scardinare la questione sulla idiozia di queste restrizioni.

Rimane il fatto che si deve fare una azione di richiesta ufficiale.

my2cents

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Istituzione dell'elenco degli alberi monumentali d'Italia

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Ora dobbiamo solo fare in modo di importarli in Wikidata!


Federico

Federico Leva (Nemo), 20/01/2015 19:38:

Letto ne "La nuova ecologia" di gennaio 2015:
* http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2014/11/18/14A08883/sg
* 
http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/canali/energiaeambiente/natura/2014/11/19/realacci-al-via-sanzioni-a-tutela-alberi-monumentali_32ee22e2-ec7d-4af8-bd6f-6199e546f9b0.html 

* 
http://www.corpoforestale.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/6309


Entro luglio 2015 dovremmo avere un elenco nazionale di alberi 
monumentali. Mi pare che ciò risolva il dubbio su quale/i "Wiki Loves" 
fare, è evidente che non si può perdere questa occasione! ;-)


L'articolo 8 prevede un elenco nel sito del corpo forestale, ma il 7 
parla dei contenuti e dice che a livello regionale è «aperto alla 
consultazione e/o all'inserimento dei dati da parte  degli  enti 
territoriali interessati, con abilitazione di funzioni diversificate». 
Mi sembra quindi che si debbano chiamare gli amici di WWF e Legambiente 
per convincere il ministero a

1) includere le coordinate geografiche nei dati da fornire;
2) assicurarsi che il tutto sia pubblicato in CC-0 e in un qualche 
formato machine-readable.


Poi andranno tutti inseriti in OSM (cc talk-it).

Nemo


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-tr] İlt: [OpenStreetMap] SomeoneElse, sizin değişiklik serilerinizden birine yorum yaptı.

[H. Can Unen]

Merhabalar,

Yellow Pages'in, hak sahibi olarak, toplanan verinin OSM'e koyulmasına izni
olmayabilir. Yellow Pages'in copyright ve privacy policy'leri verilerin
OSM'e aktarılmasına izin vermiyorsa, sizin "ben orada çalışıyorum" demeniz
yeterli gerekçe olmaz. Bu yüzden Yellow Pages'den yazılı teyit bulunması
gerekir, ondan emin olmaya çalışıyorlar. Benzer bir durumu biz de Harita
Genel Komutanlığı'yla yaşamıştık birkaç sene önce.

İkincil olarak etiketlemeyle ilgili yorumlarda bulunmuşlar, ve doğru
olduğunu düşünüyorum yourmların. "webpage" etiketinin değerini söz konusu
markaların kurumsal sayfaları olarak girmek doğru olacaktır. Yangın musluğu
markası olarak Opet demişseniz de, o da mantıklı görünmüyor, "brand" yerine
"operator" kullanmak yanlışı düzeltebilir bir ihtimal.

İyi günler.

Can




2018-05-28 8:45 GMT+03:00 Yusuf ÜLKÜ :

> Merhaba Hakan abi,
>
> Şirketim Yellow Pages Türkiye 
>
> Uzun zaman sonra bu bildirim neden geldi anlamadım. Herhalde Avrupa'daki
> GDPR olayı mı tetikledi naaptı.
> Yani biz Türkiye'deki birçok zincir markanın konumlarını tespit edip
> haritalara ekleriz.
>
> Muhtemelen Andy bey bizi bir siteden data çalıp buraya yükleyen birisi
> zannetti.
>
>
> 28 May 2018 01:35 tarihinde Hakan Tandoğan  yazdı:
>
> Merhaba Yusuf kardeş,
>
> ill soruyu ortadan kaldırmak için, "şirketimden" derken hangi şirketten
> bahsediyorsun? İşbu şirketin veriler üzerinde hakları olduğunu
> gösterebilirsek Andy beyi rahatlatabiliriz sanırım.
>
> Yok iş inata binerse senin bu katkılarını silmek isteyebilirler...
>
>
>
> On May 27, 2018 11:49:42 PM GMT+02:00, "Yusuf ÜLKÜ" <
> yusufulk...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Arkadaşlar merhaba,
>
>
> Daha önce şirketimden izin alarak paylaştığım Opet benzin istasyonlarının
> datası ile alaklı böyle bir email geldi. Ne yapmamız lazım, datanın izni
> bendedir. Onun dışında etiketlerle alakalı dediklerini anlamadım açıkçası.
> --
> *Gönderen:* OpenStreetMap 
> *Gönderildi:* 27 Mayıs 2018 Pazar 18:30
> *Kime:* yusufulk...@hotmail.com
> *Konu:* [OpenStreetMap] SomeoneElse, sizin değişiklik serilerinizden
> birine yorum yaptı.
>
> [image: OpenStreetMap]  *OpenStreetMap*
> 
>
> Merhaba 58zarali,
>
> *SomeoneElse* ,
> 2018-05-27 15:30:43 UTC tarihinde oluşturduğunuz değişikliklerinizden
> birine yorum yaptı. yorumsuz
> [image: SomeoneElse] 
>
> Merhaba 58zarali,
> Buraya aktardığınız verilerin birtakım sorunları var. Birincisi, lisansın
> OpenStreetMap ile uyumlu olmadığı görülüyor (Yellow Pages'ın sitesinden
> veriler "© 2016 - 2018 DataWorks"). Bir diğeri, yanlış olan tek tek ürün
> sayfalarını değil, marka sayfalarını işaret eden wikipedia ve wikidata
> öğelerini eklediniz. Ayrıca yukarıda belirtildiği gibi "fire_hydrant: brand
> = Opet", mantıklı bir etiket olarak görünmemektedir.
> Lütfen bu soruları ya burada ya da OSM'nin d...@osmfoundation.org
> adresindeki Veri Çalışma Grubuna e-posta ile cevaplayınız.
> Saygılarımla,
> OSMs Veri Çalışma Grubu adına Andy Townsend.
>
> Değişiklik serisiyle ilgili daha fazla bilgi
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46304500 sayfasından
> edinebilirsiniz.
>
> Bu değişiklik serisinin güncellemelerini aboneliğinizden çıkarmak için
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46304500 sayfasını ziyaret edin
> ve "Aboneliği iptal et"i tıklayın.
>
> OpenStreetMap 
>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-tr mailing list
> Talk-tr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tr
>
>
___
Talk-tr mailing list
Talk-tr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tr