Re: [talk-au] The nearmap effect
On 7 June 2010 15:41, Steve Bennett wrote: > http://www.itoworld.com/product/osm/map?colour=table&style=_default_osm_tags&area=4687:0&sort=total-&show=key_values:8 > > I only just discovered ItoWorld, heh. I think Ross reported the other week about almost 100,000 objects in OSM tagged with Nearmap as the source. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [SOTM] State of country Australia poster
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > Hello, > > This year, the State of the Map in Girona will make use of posters (A1 > vertical http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A1_paper_size ) for State of > Countries. Since last year, it has been a very interesting year for > Australia with some major imports like the boundaries and the introduction > of Nearmap. Obviously, it would be better if someone from Australia could > come to present it but I would be equally happy just to hang the poster for > people to see what is happening. The printing of the poster would be done > directly in Girona so it wouldn't be a problem if a PDF was to be sent. > I would love to see some of you just to put a face on the names that I see > and it is always better to meet in person. I'm a bit confused what you're asking for. Are you asking for someone (or someones) to produce an Australian poster? What's the deadline? Or one has already been done, but you'd like someone Australian to present it? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] The nearmap effect
http://www.itoworld.com/product/osm/map?colour=table&style=_default_osm_tags&area=4687:0&sort=total-&show=key_values:8 I only just discovered ItoWorld, heh. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On 7 June 2010 14:18, Ross Scanlon wrote: > The consensus may have been that all bridges and tunnels need to have a layer > tag and that's what I'm looking at. I don't think the wiki was updated, then again consensus is limited to the group discussing it at the time. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > > Each bridge that currently does not have a layer tag would have layer=1 > > added. > > That will be incorrect if a bridge crosses a body of water (or other > object) that has a layer tag other than zero. Which means some > renderers may go from currently rendering something correctly, to > rendering it incorrectly as a result of that change. And they are possibly rendering incorectly at the moment as it's assuming layer=0. > > Each tunnel that currently does not have a layer tag would have layer=-1 > > added. > > Likewise. Ok. So we add a fixme tag instead and something along the lines of "fixme=Does this need a layer tag?". These show up correctly on keepright and josm validator and are more of a prompt to do something about it. > > The script does the changes in small chunks, (configurable but currently > > set at maximum 100 ways), so it is easy to look through each changeset to > > see what has been added. > > Is anyone planning to do this? You said there are 2500 instances. I > don't think it's reasonable to make a massive change and leave > checking them as an exercise for the reader, without putting in place > some kind of process to actually check them. I intended that if there was a problem then any user could find the changeset easily and then advise me of the problem and I could go back and alter it or they could alter it. It's a lot easier to look through 100 ways than 2500 ways in one change set. > Incidentally: how do current renderers (principally mapnik and > osmarender) currently behave? Are any of these assumed defaults > actually implemented, or have I got my wires crossed? unknown. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On 7 June 2010 14:32, Steve Bennett wrote: > Incidentally: how do current renderers (principally mapnik and > osmarender) currently behave? Are any of these assumed defaults > actually implemented, or have I got my wires crossed? Mapnik usually renders roads on top of other things, like buildings, sometimes incorrectly, even if layer tags say it should be under things. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Anyone see any issues with running this completely and on a regular basis eg > weekly cron job. Also, one problem with doing that is it muddies the issue: if a bot is automatically adding layer tags, does that mean that humans don't have to add them? It means the answer to the question "do you have to add a layer tag to bridges" is more complicated... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Each bridge that currently does not have a layer tag would have layer=1 added. That will be incorrect if a bridge crosses a body of water (or other object) that has a layer tag other than zero. Which means some renderers may go from currently rendering something correctly, to rendering it incorrectly as a result of that change. > Each tunnel that currently does not have a layer tag would have layer=-1 > added. Likewise. > The script does the changes in small chunks, (configurable but currently set > at maximum 100 ways), so it is easy to look through each changeset to see > what has been added. Is anyone planning to do this? You said there are 2500 instances. I don't think it's reasonable to make a massive change and leave checking them as an exercise for the reader, without putting in place some kind of process to actually check them. Incidentally: how do current renderers (principally mapnik and osmarender) currently behave? Are any of these assumed defaults actually implemented, or have I got my wires crossed? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:47 AM, John Smith wrote: > > If you can run a script over data it could also be pre-processed in a > > similar manner without needing explicit tags on the objects. > > I had thought that the consensus was that layer tags *are* assumed, at > least in cases like highway/bridge crossing river. According to: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge#Combining_with_Key:layer and this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tunnel layers are not assumed and have to be added manually. The consensus may have been that all bridges and tunnels need to have a layer tag and that's what I'm looking at. > Before doing any mass updates, could we please make sure we establish > consensus and document the hell out of it somewhere? Of course. The changes will be revertable with also possibly a tag along the lines of added_by:automatic_layer_script to make easier identification. Each bridge that currently does not have a layer tag would have layer=1 added. Each tunnel that currently does not have a layer tag would have layer=-1 added. The script checks what is currently tagged for the way and if it already has a layer tag then it will not add a new tag and does not change the one already there. The script does the changes in small chunks, (configurable but currently set at maximum 100 ways), so it is easy to look through each changeset to see what has been added. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On 7 June 2010 13:31, Steve Bennett wrote: > I had thought that the consensus was that layer tags *are* assumed, at > least in cases like highway/bridge crossing river. While that may have been decided on a mailing list, I'm not sure if anyone updated the wiki to reflect it, or went so far as to file bugs against JOSM/keepright etc. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:47 AM, John Smith wrote: > If you can run a script over data it could also be pre-processed in a > similar manner without needing explicit tags on the objects. I had thought that the consensus was that layer tags *are* assumed, at least in cases like highway/bridge crossing river. Before doing any mass updates, could we please make sure we establish consensus and document the hell out of it somewhere? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
> > If you believe that you are accurately detecting a mapping problem, > > consider creating an alarm system, like OSM Inspector, keepright or > > the dupenodes map. Bring the potential problems to the attention of > > local mappers who can then apply the changes if they are required. > > This is already available in josm validator and keepright but most don't seem > to use or do anything with it. Or maybe it's an issue with how it's > displayed in these. Just checked with keepright and it does not appear to highlight it correctly: The bridge over the water in the center of the park here: http://keepright.x10hosting.com/report_map.php?zoom=17&lat=-27.43263&lon=152.99777&layers=B0T&ch30=0&ch40=0&ch50=0&ch60=0&ch70=0&ch80=1&ch90=0&ch100=0&ch110=0&ch120=0&ch140=0&ch150=0&ch160=0&ch170=0&ch180=0&ch190=0&ch200=0&ch210=0&ch220=0&ch240=0&show_ign=1&show_tmpign=1 Does not show up as a "bridge or tunnel without layer", yet the other crossings in the south of the park show up as "intersections without junctions". And josm validator shows it as "crossing way". So unless someone reads the wiki (about bridges and tunnels) then it's unlikely that they will do anything about them. -- Ross Scanlon ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
> Don't do it. Automated changes almost always go wrong. And they > almost always upset a mapper who really meant for it to be that way. As I said in my email it works correctly on a test server from a technical point of view and yes I agree about upsetting mappers that's why I'm asking the list. But does anyone know of a bridge or tunnel that should not also have a layer tag. They are there to go over or under something else and are physically separated. If there is no layer tag then the data is incorrect. > If you believe that you are accurately detecting a mapping problem, > consider creating an alarm system, like OSM Inspector, keepright or > the dupenodes map. Bring the potential problems to the attention of > local mappers who can then apply the changes if they are required. This is already available in josm validator and keepright but most don't seem to use or do anything with it. Or maybe it's an issue with how it's displayed in these. Maybe then the tag needs to be a fixme="Does this need to have a layer tag added?" rather than changing directly to a layer tag. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On 7 June 2010 11:05, Ross Scanlon wrote: > These are not assumed and need to be added. Most bridges and tunnels could be assumed when there is water involved, I'm pretty sure someone, might have been Steve, brought this up on the tagging list a few months ago. > At this point in time there are about 2500 (bridges and tunnels) in Australia > that don't have a layer tag. It took about 5 minutes to run on the test > server but that's using a direct network connection and not over the internet > so would be longer. If you can run a script over data it could also be pre-processed in a similar manner without needing explicit tags on the objects. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Hi All, > > I've been looking at tagwatch again and find that there are lots of bridges > and tunnels without layer tags. > > These are not assumed and need to be added. > > Before we all rush out and start amending the tags I've writen a script to > add layer tags to these automatically. > > It is working on my test server and I'm looking at running it on the osm > database. > > The script works in a similar manner to the revert scripts and in fact uses > some of the functions from there > > It has to be run on a server running tagwatch (not a problem on my test > server). > > At this point in time there are about 2500 (bridges and tunnels) in Australia > that don't have a layer tag. It took about 5 minutes to run on the test > server but that's using a direct network connection and not over the internet > so would be longer. > > The script complies with the suggestions here: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/Code_of_Conduct > > It checks the current status of the way (bridge or tunnel) on osm and will > only add a layer tag if there is not one there. > > I have dryrun it on a small bounding box within australia and it shows no > problems. > > Anyone see any issues with running this completely and on a regular basis eg > weekly cron job. Don't do it. Automated changes almost always go wrong. And they almost always upset a mapper who really meant for it to be that way. If you believe that you are accurately detecting a mapping problem, consider creating an alarm system, like OSM Inspector, keepright or the dupenodes map. Bring the potential problems to the attention of local mappers who can then apply the changes if they are required. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Bridges and Tunnels
Hi All, I've been looking at tagwatch again and find that there are lots of bridges and tunnels without layer tags. These are not assumed and need to be added. Before we all rush out and start amending the tags I've writen a script to add layer tags to these automatically. It is working on my test server and I'm looking at running it on the osm database. The script works in a similar manner to the revert scripts and in fact uses some of the functions from there It has to be run on a server running tagwatch (not a problem on my test server). At this point in time there are about 2500 (bridges and tunnels) in Australia that don't have a layer tag. It took about 5 minutes to run on the test server but that's using a direct network connection and not over the internet so would be longer. The script complies with the suggestions here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/Code_of_Conduct It checks the current status of the way (bridge or tunnel) on osm and will only add a layer tag if there is not one there. I have dryrun it on a small bounding box within australia and it shows no problems. Anyone see any issues with running this completely and on a regular basis eg weekly cron job. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] The_Sturt_Highway_Virtual_Mapping_Party
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/The_Sturt_Highway_Virtual_Mapping_Party thought today after 700km on the road that this project should be permanent I started with a few notes on the wiki i imagine that someone would do a stretch like Merbein South to Lake Cullulleraine and do the north side of the road, checking the cross roads and getting road names, checking the microwave transmission towers and rest areas and someone else / another trip do the south side of the road for the same stretch of road. Today i drove some more of Waikerie and also Monash in SA ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
