Re: [talk-au] More Nearmap imagery
Yet more imagery is becoming available, filling in most of the gap south of Bendigo. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/904578 Nearmap now covers about 1.7% of Australia, pushing the area from just under 49,000km^2 the other day to now almost 57,000km^2. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On Sat, 8 May 2010, John Henderson wrote: There's a very sensible proposal for tagging fords which overcomes the problem of ways tagged as highway=ford not rendering: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ford John H Useful tags layer=* As the road is literally under the waterway, the layer tag should be that of the waterway minus one. would we agree here when the waterway is dry (normal condition to me) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 08/05/10 07:14, Liz wrote: Useful tags layer=* As the road is literally under the waterway, the layer tag should be that of the waterway minus one. would we agree here when the waterway is dry (normal condition to me) Interesting. Some fords are across permanent waterways, and there're all shades of grey between that and the normal state of most South Australian rivers. The -1 layer tag accurately describes the situation when the ford=yes tag is actually and literally applicable. There may be no special construction of the roadway at a ford - just a warning to expect a wet crossing for a period after some decent rain. So I think the layer tag is OK. John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 08/05/10 10:19, ed...@billiau.net wrote: so the tag needs an icon a design is suggested but it needs drawing out so it can progress through to being rendered anyone can make a set of icons (for different colours of roads)? I was revisiting fords because I noticed an icon already in use for highway=ford when applied to a single node. See: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-34.549231lon=148.352637zoom=18layers=B000FTF and we could use whatever layer tag is more appropriate as well as note that these may also be described as causeway in Au and shouldn't be confused with causeway Not to mention the difference between a ford and a floodway. Sometimes the distinction isn't clear, and best left to the mapper. John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More Nearmap imagery
On 8 May 2010 11:16, Luke Woolley lswool...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting. It looks like NearMap was denied air traffic clearance to fly over Puckapunyal. I would have thought flying over it would be a non-issue but it looks like it was one. I'm quite surprised how many military areas they have been allowed to fly over. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 07:29, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: The -1 layer tag accurately describes the situation when the ford=yes tag is actually and literally applicable. There may be no special construction of the roadway at a ford - just a warning to expect a wet crossing for a period after some decent rain. So I think the layer tag is OK. In my opinion, since the roadway isn't a tunnel under the waterway, the layer tag should be the same as the waterway. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 07:14, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: would we agree here when the waterway is dry (normal condition to me) Depends which side the range you are on, east of it they are often wet. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 11:16, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: Not to mention the difference between a ford and a floodway. Sometimes the distinction isn't clear, and best left to the mapper. What is the difference between a ford and a floodway/causeway? I thought they were the same thing. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-talk] old Army Map Service Topographic Maps as WMS ?
Since US Gov data isn't copyright I thought this might interest some as there is some Australian maps... http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/imw/txu-oclc-6654394-sd-sc-52-2nd-ed.jpg http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/imw/txu-oclc-6654394-sd-sc-54-2nd-ed.jpg http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/imw/txu-oclc-6654394-sf-49-50-1st-ed.jpg http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/imw/txu-oclc-6654394-sg-49-50.jpg http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/imw/txu-oclc-6654394-sh-si-52-1st-ed.jpg http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/imw/txu-oclc-6654394-st-57-60.jpg -- Forwarded message -- From: AssetBurned openstreet...@assetburned.de Date: 8 May 2010 06:46 Subject: [OSM-talk] old Army Map Service Topographic Maps as WMS ? To: t...@openstreetmap.org Hi, in the german mailing list, one of our fellow mapper posted a link to the University of Texas Libraries collection of Army Maps. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/ He asked if it would be a source, he could use to name places in OSM. So I forward this question and add my own. Can we use it and would it be possible for someone to convert the maps into a WMS format? Even if some of the maps are from the 1940s, it would help to name places in areas where we doesn't have local mapper or limited ressources. cu AssetBurned ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 12:37, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: On 08/05/10 11:57, John Smith wrote: What is the difference between a ford and a floodway/causeway? I thought they were the same thing. And a floodway to be a section of road that you wouldn't usually need to slow for, but which might be subject to brief flooding after local rain. But you didn't answer the question, what's the difference between a floodway and a ford? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 13:03, ed...@billiau.net wrote: Floodways are often in places were you can't even see the creek bed. http://billiau.net/zoph/photo.php?album_id=23_order=date_off=4151 (Just about the last picture before we broke down Australia Day) Ok, so flood plain or flood prone areas... actually the next two pictures have the depth markers ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 13:16, ed...@billiau.net wrote: actually the next two pictures have the depth markers The Gwydir Highway east of Moree has a long stretch of road signed as flood plain including depth markers, but I'm still looking on google street view for the signs... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On Sat, 8 May 2010, John Smith wrote: On 8 May 2010 13:16, ed...@billiau.net wrote: actually the next two pictures have the depth markers The Gwydir Highway east of Moree has a long stretch of road signed as flood plain including depth markers, but I'm still looking on google street view for the signs... This sort of thing is very useful to have mapped -- Its name is Public Opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On Sat, 8 May 2010, John Smith wrote: Now that I'm less confused about terminology being used I think fords and floodways/floodplains should be tagged differently, in the case of fords they can be assumed to be safe to cross when there is water present, floodways/floodplains/floodprone on the other hand can be hazardous when water is crossing the road way and I even wrote a page stub about the latter case: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:flood_prone does it need a photo? -- As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; they kill us for their sport. -- Shakespeare, King Lear ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 08/05/10 12:55, John Smith wrote: But you didn't answer the question, what's the difference between a floodway and a ford? This is all off the top of my head, but a ford will generally have flowing water, and a floodway not (or be more slowly flowing). A ford generally crosses a stream bed, whereas a floodway is the roadway part of an area subject to general inundation when floodwaters back up. Both can be much too deep to cross when it's wet. John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 08/05/10 12:43, John Smith wrote: If a causeway/floodway is signed you usually should slow down for them cause they can be nasty little dips you will bottom out in... Most floodway signs don't require slowing unless it's raining. John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rendering fords
On 8 May 2010 15:14, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: Most floodway signs don't require slowing unless it's raining. I understood after Liz's photos, I'm used to them being referred as flood plains. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
