Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > The UBD printed maps have a marking > called "untrafficable road" (or something to that > effect). Basically it's a designation for roads which > are gazetted but don't exist. Does anyone have a problem with these roads being marked on OSM? If not, does anyone have a problem with using highway=untrafficable? I noticed this sort of thing has come up on other lists: http://archive.aussiehighways.com/msg04516.html ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Franc Carter wrote: > I heard an interesting story about the planning of early > Sydney roads (I hope it wasn't on this list). > The claim was that the roads were planned by someone > sitting in London and drawing a straight > line between two points . . . . That was my tactic in simcity :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
The cliff isn't really significant enough to mark in. I could fudge up the creek from memory, I guess. - Original Message - From: John Smith Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 1:25 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads... To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au > > > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au > wrote: > > > The UBD printed maps have a marking > > called "untrafficable road" (or something to that > > effect). Basically it's a designation for roads which > > are gazetted but don't exist. > > A quick search comes up with untrafficable & non-trafficable > road :) > > I don't really mind which way things go in terms of naming, but > I really think it's important to include the errata of other > maps so people don't waste their time mapping things that don't > exist or never existed. > > > There's a creek which runs through there, along with a > > ~10m high cliff face on the Northern side. I used to live in > > Knox Ave and spent much of my childhood exploring the bush > > around there. > > Why haven't you marked in the creek and cliff face? :) > > > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
I heard an interesting story about the planning of early Sydney roads (I hope it wasn't on this list). The claim was that the roads were planned by someone sitting in London and drawing a straight line between two points . . . . cheers On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, wrote: > The UBD printed maps have a marking called "untrafficable road" (or > something to that effect). Basically it's a designation for roads which are > gazetted but don't exist. > > eg: Stanley Road, Epping, NSW: > > OSM: http://osm.org/go/u...@fn8li- > Whereis: http://www.whereis.com/nsw/epping/stanley-rd?id=93E9799C00893A > > There's a creek which runs through there, along with a ~10m high cliff face > on the Northern side. I used to live in Knox Ave and spent much of my > childhood exploring the bush around there. > > Brent > > > - Original Message - > From: John Smith > Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:10 pm > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads... > To: Ben Kelley > Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > > > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, Ben Kelley wrote: > > > > > > > Maybe something on a wiki page, but how do you know to look > > > there? > > > > There is a lot of roads marked on g'maps and others that just > > don't exist, you'd get lost in the noise. > > > > > doesn't actually exist. This system is not much use to > > > someone else trying to survey the same area though. > > > > Yup, exactly, I more or less know what is there when I was > > surveying it with a GPS, but that doesn't help the next person, > > for roads that partially exist I put a barrier in, but that > > doesn't help for complete roads that don't exist. > > > > > Another case would be for streets that no longer exist, but > > > once existed, and where there are GPS traces in OSM for the > > > street that used to exist. (There are a couple in Tamworth > > > like this.) I don't have a good solution for these. > > > > Something that came to mind reading your reply was > > railway=abandoned, it doesn't render but it's still marked, > > there's no way we'd get agreement upon this from the main list > > they're still going in circles over trees and paths. > > > > Something like highway=abandoned or highway=phantom, I'm not > > advocating to copy from other maps, but if you have mapped out > > streets near by it should be possible to approximate rough > > location in OSM database. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Talk-au mailing list > > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > There's a creek which runs through there, along with a > ~10m high cliff face on the Northern side. I used to live in > Knox Ave and spent much of my childhood exploring the bush > around there. Also it looks like someone hasn't mapped the epping to chatswood line properly nearby, no layer/tunnel tags, I'd update it but I can't remember if the whole thing is underground or where it comes up. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > The UBD printed maps have a marking > called "untrafficable road" (or something to that > effect). Basically it's a designation for roads which > are gazetted but don't exist. A quick search comes up with untrafficable & non-trafficable road :) I don't really mind which way things go in terms of naming, but I really think it's important to include the errata of other maps so people don't waste their time mapping things that don't exist or never existed. > There's a creek which runs through there, along with a > ~10m high cliff face on the Northern side. I used to live in > Knox Ave and spent much of my childhood exploring the bush > around there. Why haven't you marked in the creek and cliff face? :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
The UBD printed maps have a marking called "untrafficable road" (or something to that effect). Basically it's a designation for roads which are gazetted but don't exist. eg: Stanley Road, Epping, NSW: OSM: http://osm.org/go/u...@fn8li- Whereis: http://www.whereis.com/nsw/epping/stanley-rd?id=93E9799C00893A There's a creek which runs through there, along with a ~10m high cliff face on the Northern side. I used to live in Knox Ave and spent much of my childhood exploring the bush around there. Brent - Original Message - From: John Smith Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:10 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads... To: Ben Kelley Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, Ben Kelley wrote: > > > > Maybe something on a wiki page, but how do you know to look > > there? > > There is a lot of roads marked on g'maps and others that just > don't exist, you'd get lost in the noise. > > > doesn't actually exist. This system is not much use to > > someone else trying to survey the same area though. > > Yup, exactly, I more or less know what is there when I was > surveying it with a GPS, but that doesn't help the next person, > for roads that partially exist I put a barrier in, but that > doesn't help for complete roads that don't exist. > > > Another case would be for streets that no longer exist, but > > once existed, and where there are GPS traces in OSM for the > > street that used to exist. (There are a couple in Tamworth > > like this.) I don't have a good solution for these. > > Something that came to mind reading your reply was > railway=abandoned, it doesn't render but it's still marked, > there's no way we'd get agreement upon this from the main list > they're still going in circles over trees and paths. > > Something like highway=abandoned or highway=phantom, I'm not > advocating to copy from other maps, but if you have mapped out > streets near by it should be possible to approximate rough > location in OSM database. > > Thoughts? > > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, Ben Kelley wrote: > Maybe something on a wiki page, but how do you know to look > there? There is a lot of roads marked on g'maps and others that just don't exist, you'd get lost in the noise. > doesn't actually exist. This system is not much use to > someone else trying to survey the same area though. Yup, exactly, I more or less know what is there when I was surveying it with a GPS, but that doesn't help the next person, for roads that partially exist I put a barrier in, but that doesn't help for complete roads that don't exist. > Another case would be for streets that no longer exist, but > once existed, and where there are GPS traces in OSM for the > street that used to exist. (There are a couple in Tamworth > like this.) I don't have a good solution for these. Something that came to mind reading your reply was railway=abandoned, it doesn't render but it's still marked, there's no way we'd get agreement upon this from the main list they're still going in circles over trees and paths. Something like highway=abandoned or highway=phantom, I'm not advocating to copy from other maps, but if you have mapped out streets near by it should be possible to approximate rough location in OSM database. Thoughts? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
On 12/08/2009, at 11:20 AM, John Smith wrote: > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, BlueMM wrote: >> I've found Google Maps directions in Australia to be very >> good in the past, it >> seems to pick the best route the majority of the time. > > At times I've been routed along no through roads, other times google > encourages me to enter private property, it also routed me along a > track through a national park. Those are just the more notable > examples. +1000 Which is why I usually get Google maps to give me a route, check it in my printed road atlas, and then use my car GPS' to remind me roughly when the turns are coming up. Last night a friend sent me a Google Maps link which included an area I had surveyed for road names/POIs a few days ago. In a roughly 600m x 500m section of the suburb, I can see two non-existent roads, 9 roads that join up when they don't, 4 roads that go across 2m streams when they don't, one road that is basically someone's driveway, and a whole bunch minor things. Not bad for 0.3 sq km. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
Hi. Yes this has been an issue for me a few times surveying cycle routes. The council map says that this street is a cycle route, but when you go there it clearly isn't. Something along the lines of "you might think that this should be in OSM, but it shouldn't because it doesn't exist." Maybe something on a wiki page, but how do you know to look there? For my own purposes I mark on my paper map what I have surveyed into OSM, and what I have surveyed to know it doesn't actually exist. This system is not much use to someone else trying to survey the same area though. For things where there is at least some kind of way on the ground you can put a note in OSM, but sometimes in reality there is nothing on the ground. e.g. phantom streets that other maps say exist. Another case would be for streets that no longer exist, but once existed, and where there are GPS traces in OSM for the street that used to exist. (There are a couple in Tamworth like this.) I don't have a good solution for these. - Ben. 2009/8/12 John Smith > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, Franc Carter wrote: > > > I was out mapping near Appin on Sunday and Google and the > > map in my consumer gps > > had large numbers of non existent roads - and getting to > > Tarago by TomTom was a > > disaster > > Does anyone have a suggestion on marking non-existent roads, so people > don't waste time trying to map them? > > > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Marking non-existent roads...
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, Franc Carter wrote: > I was out mapping near Appin on Sunday and Google and the > map in my consumer gps > had large numbers of non existent roads - and getting to > Tarago by TomTom was a > disaster Does anyone have a suggestion on marking non-existent roads, so people don't waste time trying to map them? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
I was out mapping near Appin on Sunday and Google and the map in my consumer gps had large numbers of non existent roads - and getting to Tarago by TomTom was a disaster On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:20 AM, John Smith wrote: > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, BlueMM wrote: > > > I've found Google Maps directions in Australia to be very > > good in the past, it > > seems to pick the best route the majority of the time. > > At times I've been routed along no through roads, other times google > encourages me to enter private property, it also routed me along a track > through a national park. Those are just the more notable examples. > > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, BlueMM wrote: > I've found Google Maps directions in Australia to be very > good in the past, it > seems to pick the best route the majority of the time. At times I've been routed along no through roads, other times google encourages me to enter private property, it also routed me along a track through a national park. Those are just the more notable examples. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Garmin routable (was Re: Cycleway/footway/path)
OT, but get a different version of the routable maps. I used to have a version that thought footpaths were great for driving on. Try the ones from here http://www.osmaustralia.org/garminroute.php My current wish list is declaring a street index so you can search for streets, and handling the no-right-turn data. - Ben. 2009/8/11 Liz > My Garmin thing wanted me to use a walking / cycle track alongside Lake > Burley > Griffin once > > -- Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com http://www.users.on.net/~bhkelley/ ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
John Smith writes: > --- On Mon, 10/8/09, b.schulz...@... > wrote: > > thing I still use Google Maps for is route distance > > measurement so it would be great to have an OSM-based way to > > do this. > > I try not to use google routing where possible, it's sent me up the garden > path > way too many times, I refer to it as being 'googled' :) I've found Google Maps directions in Australia to be very good in the past, it seems to pick the best route the majority of the time. Unlike in France, when we ended up in tiny country lanes in the middle of nowhere looking for our hotel, or Cinque Terre in Italy, where it thought "streets" were drivable, when in fact it was hard for two people to walk past each other. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rendering wish list
> Although they don't accurately depict the Fitzroy Development road. Actually they do, I was just looking at the wrong part... :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rendering wish list
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, Peter Ross wrote: > I would like to be able to distinguish between paved paths > and unpaved > surfaces (mainly for paths, but roads would be useful as > well). The importance of knowing unpaved roads depends how far inland from the coast you go :) Probably exponentially so. > I don't mind how it's represented but a suggestion is to > use dots > rather than dashes for those types of paths. For the > roads, I'm not > sure what the best way to represent is. Well street-directory.com.au which just shows scanned images of paper maps does redish orange dashed lines http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/mapsearch.cgi?star=5&heading=&x=149.26777035609842&y=-23.422484849758355&level=4&StateID=4 The importance of the road is indicated by the thickness of the lines. Although they don't accurately depict the Fitzroy Development road. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Rendering wish list
Are there any other things people would like to be rendered differently from the standard OSM tiles? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aussie_Mapnik_Style_Changes ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fw: [OSM-talk] openstreetmap.org completely down
Maybe this is why OSM maps didn't work... --- On Tue, 11/8/09, Andre Hinrichs wrote: > From: Andre Hinrichs > Subject: [OSM-talk] openstreetmap.org completely down > To: t...@openstreetmap.org > Date: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009, 3:25 AM > Hi List, > > I just discovered, that the whole site seems to be down > including > www,api,gpx > > Hope, that mail is working. I will update the status at > wiki to DOWN > now. Please change if site is available again. > > > Regards > Andre > > > -Inline Attachment Follows- > > ___ > talk mailing list > t...@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, James Livingston wrote: > I mean different/opposite to what was on one of LC working > group > pages, not that wiki page (which had virtually no info > until a few > days ago) There is a similar page with almost not content... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Groups Actually there are a few other similar pages. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On 11/08/2009, at 11:35 PM, James Livingston wrote: > Ah, that seems to have been updates two days ago, and a whole bunch of > things are now different then they were before (in some cases, saying > the complete opposite). > > I probably should have re-read the page first. I mean different/opposite to what was on one of LC working group pages, not that wiki page (which had virtually no info until a few days ago) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On 11/08/2009, at 11:29 PM, John Smith wrote: > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, James Livingston wrote: >> From what I've read about OSM Local Chapters, we would >> have a local >> entity which is "federated" to the OSM Foundation. Which >> means that >> the local entity (e.g. OSM Australia, although it could be >> an existing >> mapping/GIS body not exclusive to OSM) can say they >> officially >> represent OSM in Australia, use the OSM trademark, have all >> of our >> members be voting members of OSMF, and the like. > > That's not what's currently on the wiki, they explicitly state being > a member of a local chapter doesn't make you a member of OSMF and > vice versa. > > Also no mention the the chapter itself being a member of OSMF. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters > > Automatic membership might have been suggested at some point by > someone but it doesn't look like it has been continued for various > legal/liability reasons etc. Ah, that seems to have been updates two days ago, and a whole bunch of things are now different then they were before (in some cases, saying the complete opposite). I probably should have re-read the page first. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, James Livingston wrote: > From what I've read about OSM Local Chapters, we would > have a local > entity which is "federated" to the OSM Foundation. Which > means that > the local entity (e.g. OSM Australia, although it could be > an existing > mapping/GIS body not exclusive to OSM) can say they > officially > represent OSM in Australia, use the OSM trademark, have all > of our > members be voting members of OSMF, and the like. That's not what's currently on the wiki, they explicitly state being a member of a local chapter doesn't make you a member of OSMF and vice versa. Also no mention the the chapter itself being a member of OSMF. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters Automatic membership might have been suggested at some point by someone but it doesn't look like it has been continued for various legal/liability reasons etc. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On 11/08/2009, at 4:51 PM, Liz wrote: > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: >> >> If anything I'm trying to figure out the easiest way to achieve an >> outcome, >> the outcome needs a legal entity of some sort, a local entity would >> be one >> way, another is to go via OSMF although I don't know how much or how >> willing they would be either. >> > we would be better with a local entity > its not easy for a company to deal with something international From what I've read about OSM Local Chapters, we would have a local entity which is "federated" to the OSM Foundation. Which means that the local entity (e.g. OSM Australia, although it could be an existing mapping/GIS body not exclusive to OSM) can say they officially represent OSM in Australia, use the OSM trademark, have all of our members be voting members of OSMF, and the like. If anyone is familiar with the Linux community, this is basically the same as having the Linux Australia as the peak body to which all the local Linux User Groups are affiliated. Money is an interesting issue. Currently (although there is some discussion right not on osmf-talk) you need to pay £15 a year to be a member of OSMF, and the last I read of Local Chapters the plan was for the LC to pay £10 per member to OSMF to be federated which lets them all be OSMF members too. That could change however. At the current exchange rate, that would mean being a member of OSM Australia would need to cost at least $20 a year, plus anything for the local chapter to run itself. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, BlueMM wrote: > Therefore, I support the local chapter idea, even if I > don't yet know what is > involved. As I've written in other emails, I'm looking at this as a means to an end, and the main focus should be on what would a local entity do for OSM in Australia. As you've pointed out there is numerous reasons for doing this, I've thought about the LGA (council) problem, if they are adding on to GeoSciences Australia (ga.gov.au) data and if that costs them money a lot of councils now are actually quite vulnerable due to bad investments and they could see this as a good way to save a stack of money. Just thinking out loud :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
John Smith writes: > > > Just to let everyone know what's happening, the guy I work for has become interested in both helping the > community and to get into selling mapping services. He also has numerous business connections. > > There has already been some unofficial talks with a company that makes phone handsets with GPS/3G and they > seem willing to donate quite a number of these for some kind of schools/education programme. > > The idea is the phones would be lent out on a per month basis, along with an education pack describing all the > ways schools can get involved in various activities, hopefully it can be made fun and exciting. :) > > For this to happen there needs to be some kind of official presence for these companies to deal with, if they > donate goods it has to be owned by some entity, as the company offering phones won't want to deal with > schools directly. > > Most government departments don't like dealing with individuals so there needs to be an official group > behind this. > > I don't know if starting a local chapter would be the best solution, but on the other hand things might be made > more difficult, if things default to OSMF in the UK. > > However before any of this can occur I really need to know if people have a genuine concern with setting up a > local chapter or not. I've been thinking about this for the last 6+ months, after the local chapter idea was first mentioned on the Talk mailing list. Mostly in relation to contacting potential sources of data who would be willing to submit their data compatible with the OSM license (federal/state departments, local councils, trucking companies etc.) Being backed by some form of official entity would make the discussions much easier, who wants to be thought of as a few nerds doing their own hobby for fun (which might be correct, but ignores all the advantages of having world-wide open mapping data). I've had some discussions with the GIS boss of my local council, but it seems copyright of most data ends up with state & federal agencies, most of the remaining data is tainted by sharing boundries/nodes with existing copyright data :-( Therefore, I support the local chapter idea, even if I don't yet know what is involved. BlueMM ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Updating the Australian Tagging Guidelines
Liz writes: > > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: > > The current use of highway=residential/highway=unclassified is almost on > > par with what the germans use it for, it is the lowest road used for the > > interconnecting grid, residential is usually the lowest in towns/cities and > > track is the lowest everywhere. > > > > Can someone suggest changes to the tagging guidelines to make this clear? > > > > I'm not saying you shouldn't use residential if you think it's residential, > > but if the road is wider and more used than residential, but less than > > tertiary this seems to be what happens else where and if we leave things as > > is on the wiki people are tagging rural roads as residential. > > What it says on the wiki under 'stralya for rural is unclassified for "other > named rural roads" > and for urban > "other streets, not generally through roads" > > seems clear enough to me > > but it may not be clear enough to others I always understood that: use residential along normal urban/town residential roads; truck/primary etc. for appropriate urban/ A+B+C rural roads; for all other rural roads and urban roads in industrial estates etc. use unclassified. The Melways uses local roads as the lowest form of paved roads, but I think OSM splits this with residential local roads as highway=residential & all other local roads are highway=unclassified. BlueMM ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:23 PM, John Smith wrote: > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, Peter Ross wrote: > >> That is way cool. However only the ti...@home tiles >> work for me, >> mapnik and cyclemap not all. >> >> Have you had the same problem? > > Everything worked for me except the bottom 2 options which look to be dutch > specific. > Just tried again and it all works now. Strange ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, Peter Ross wrote: > That is way cool. However only the ti...@home tiles > work for me, > mapnik and cyclemap not all. > > Have you had the same problem? Everything worked for me except the bottom 2 options which look to be dutch specific. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Webpage layout
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:16 PM, John Smith wrote: > > --- On Mon, 10/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: >> Yeah, completely understand your >> stance on it mate. In the end I'd probably keep using >> Google anyway because most of my route planning is on >> unmapped roads. If they're mapped chances are >> they're too busy for a cyclist or I've already been >> there :p. > > I mostly use google to figure out what needs to be mapped, I'm going to be > making a lot less use of it for general routing. > > Things like this site: > > http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=10&lat=-28.78933&lon=153.44879&layers=B0TF > > Are very useful for figuring out what needs to be done. > That is way cool. However only the ti...@home tiles work for me, mapnik and cyclemap not all. Have you had the same problem? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
--- On Tue, 11/8/09, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Problem is initial and ongoing cost. No idea about other states, but NSW lists the cost of incorporation as $109 and $47 to lodge an annual statement, I don't think there are any other ongoing fees, just once off fees depending on circumstances. http://www.dft.nsw.gov.au/About_us/What_the_Office_of_Fair_Trading_does/Fees/Associations_fees.html That isn't much money if there is about 20 people chipping in, 20 is the number of people OSMF suggest as a minimum for a local chapter: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters#Rules_for_Local_Chapters ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cullerin Wind Farm (NSW)
The road in had a "no entry" sign, so I walked in from a completely different direction. No signs, and only a flimsy sheep fence. I got sprung by a couple of young workmen, who told me I shouldn't be there. But I'm probably old enough to be their grandfather :) John --- John Smith wrote: Wow, that's dedication :) Nice work on it too, but most wind farms I've seen were on private property, except a lone one near a majorish road in Newcastle, so not sure if many/most of these would be easily surveyed. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:31:53 + (GMT) John Smith wrote: > > Just to let everyone know what's happening, the guy I work for has become > interested in both helping the community and to get into selling mapping > services. He also has numerous business connections. > > There has already been some unofficial talks with a company that makes phone > handsets with GPS/3G and they seem willing to donate quite a number of these > for some kind of schools/education programme. > > The idea is the phones would be lent out on a per month basis, along with an > education pack describing all the ways schools can get involved in various > activities, hopefully it can be made fun and exciting. :) > > For this to happen there needs to be some kind of official presence for these > companies to deal with, if they donate goods it has to be owned by some > entity, as the company offering phones won't want to deal with schools > directly. > > Most government departments don't like dealing with individuals so there > needs to be an official group behind this. > > I don't know if starting a local chapter would be the best solution, but on > the other hand things might be made more difficult, if things default to OSMF > in the UK. > > However before any of this can occur I really need to know if people have a > genuine concern with setting up a local chapter or not. Definitely a local chapter. Probably the best bet an incorporated entity. Problem is initial and ongoing cost. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
