Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
On 10 October 2010 16:57, Andrew Harvey wrote: > An OSM file like the http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/changeset/0123/download), or the > Save As? As JOSM spits out, that way the changes can be reviewed without changing the database... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 6:15 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 10 October 2010 16:57, Andrew Harvey wrote: >> An OSM file like the > http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/changeset/0123/download), or the >> Save As? > > As JOSM spits out, that way the changes can be reviewed without > changing the database... > http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~amha119/botany-bay-relation.osm How do you tell the changes from the things that haven't changed when viewing this in JOSM though? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
On 10 October 2010 17:25, Andrew Harvey wrote: > How do you tell the changes from the things that haven't changed when > viewing this in JOSM though? You load a new layer from the DB and can compare the 2... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
Had a look, a few errors spotted. 1) Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay are joined together as a way. Need to separarate them as separate ways. Easiest way is to create 2 filters on each way. IE Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay. Then you can turn each way off and on to fix. 2) Botany Bay is still set as coastline. 3) Should set Botany Bay relation as mulipolygon. Then make islands inners of Botany Bay Multipolygon. Also make other 3 bays as outers. 4) Add extra way for coastline across Botany Bay after removing coastline from Botany Bay. I think thats it. Regards, Markus_g -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 5:28 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM, John Smith wrote: > So I would agree with this proposal, although I'd like to see an OSM > file before hand of the changes... An OSM file like the http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/changeset/0123/download), or the Save As? ___ 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] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
Note: This is of course you are wanting to make the 3 bays part of Botany bay. Markus_g -Original Message- From: Markus_g [mailto:marku...@bigpond.com] Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 8:41 PM To: 'Andrew Harvey'; 'OSM Australian Talk List' Subject: RE: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation Had a look, a few errors spotted. 1) Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay are joined together as a way. Need to separarate them as separate ways. Easiest way is to create 2 filters on each way. IE Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay. Then you can turn each way off and on to fix. 2) Botany Bay is still set as coastline. 3) Should set Botany Bay relation as mulipolygon. Then make islands inners of Botany Bay Multipolygon. Also make other 3 bays as outers. 4) Add extra way for coastline across Botany Bay after removing coastline from Botany Bay. I think thats it. Regards, Markus_g -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 5:28 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM, John Smith wrote: > So I would agree with this proposal, although I'd like to see an OSM > file before hand of the changes... An OSM file like the http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/changeset/0123/download), or the Save As? ___ 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] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM, John Smith wrote: > Me personally I like the maritime law description, where the coast > line cuts across bays and the mouths of rivers etc... On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Markus_g wrote: > 4) Add extra way for coastline across Botany Bay after removing coastline > from Botany Bay. Oh I see now. If the bay is tagged as natural=bay instead of natural=coastline, then suddenly the mouth of the bay/river creates a gap/hole for the coastline. So you say, the artificial line that joins the two heads lands on either side of the entrance becomes a coastline, even though the line doesn't have land on one side and sea on the other. On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Markus_g wrote: > 1) Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay are joined together as a way. Need to > separarate them as separate ways. Easiest way is to create 2 filters on each > way. IE Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay. Then you can turn each way off and on to > fix. Are they? They look seperate to me in JOSM. > 2) Botany Bay is still set as coastline. I'm afraid that if I remove the natural=coastline, then mapnik won't show it up as blue even if it is part of a bay relation. I'm not sure though. > 3) Should set Botany Bay relation as mulipolygon. Then make islands inners > of Botany Bay Multipolygon. Also make other 3 bays as outers. Okay. If I add the smaller bays as outers (considering they are part of the larger Botany Bay), then will mapnik render the name in each of the polygons in the multi polygons, like it does for all the other multi polygons? I was trying to avoid this, that is why in the second link I gave to the .osm file I did not set the relation type. So you think I shouldn't worry about this and use a multipolygon anyway? >Note: This is of course you are wanting to make the 3 bays part of Botany bay. Actually, maybe those bays should not be part of Botany Bay, I guess it's not universally agreed on. Although there are still other bays which I think you would consider part of the larger Botany Bay, like Congwong Bay. The whole point of moving these nodes to areas is that renders can then choose to show names for large bays on low zooms, and conversely not show names for very small bays until high zooms. The same problem arises with bays in rivers, usually the bay is part of the river, hence you need to start using relations. Thank you both for the help. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
1) Yes the natural= oastline needs to go across the bay entrance if you are turning it into a bay or river, etc. 2) Have a look at the relation within the relation editor and you should see that the two bays join as one way and not as two separate polygons. 3)I think it prob isn't part of Botany Bay as the bays have separate names. This means you won't need a relation and only 4 separate way areas. If anyone in the future decides they should be all part as Botany bay a relation can then easily be added. 4) natural=bay should render as blue. If it doesn't then you can change it to natural=water. You can always send a dirty command to update any tiles that are wrong. Regards, Markus_g -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 9:08 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM, John Smith wrote: > Me personally I like the maritime law description, where the coast > line cuts across bays and the mouths of rivers etc... On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Markus_g wrote: > 4) Add extra way for coastline across Botany Bay after removing coastline > from Botany Bay. Oh I see now. If the bay is tagged as natural=bay instead of natural=coastline, then suddenly the mouth of the bay/river creates a gap/hole for the coastline. So you say, the artificial line that joins the two heads lands on either side of the entrance becomes a coastline, even though the line doesn't have land on one side and sea on the other. On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Markus_g wrote: > 1) Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay are joined together as a way. Need to > separarate them as separate ways. Easiest way is to create 2 filters on each > way. IE Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay. Then you can turn each way off and on to > fix. Are they? They look seperate to me in JOSM. > 2) Botany Bay is still set as coastline. I'm afraid that if I remove the natural=coastline, then mapnik won't show it up as blue even if it is part of a bay relation. I'm not sure though. > 3) Should set Botany Bay relation as mulipolygon. Then make islands inners > of Botany Bay Multipolygon. Also make other 3 bays as outers. Okay. If I add the smaller bays as outers (considering they are part of the larger Botany Bay), then will mapnik render the name in each of the polygons in the multi polygons, like it does for all the other multi polygons? I was trying to avoid this, that is why in the second link I gave to the .osm file I did not set the relation type. So you think I shouldn't worry about this and use a multipolygon anyway? >Note: This is of course you are wanting to make the 3 bays part of Botany bay. Actually, maybe those bays should not be part of Botany Bay, I guess it's not universally agreed on. Although there are still other bays which I think you would consider part of the larger Botany Bay, like Congwong Bay. The whole point of moving these nodes to areas is that renders can then choose to show names for large bays on low zooms, and conversely not show names for very small bays until high zooms. The same problem arises with bays in rivers, usually the bay is part of the river, hence you need to start using relations. Thank you both for the help. ___ 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] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
Looks like someone has made a recent error anyway with Botany bay. They have created a closed bay and marked it as coastline. It should be marked as natural=bay or natural=water with the coastline across the entrance of the bay. Markus_g ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
I've made the revisions, http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~amha119/botany-bay-relation2.osm So I've used the multipolygon to make islands as inner, and left the other bays are separate bays. After I get this working I can then try to turn Congwong Bay at the East into an area, and then it can be debated if that is separate, or part of Botany Bay. I'll upload this one tomorrow if there are no further objections or suggestions. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
Almost. 1) Bare Island isn't a closed way. But that can be easily fixed. 2) Remove the tags from the outer way of Botany Bay and label the multipolygon with name=Botany Bay natural=bay attribution=ABS Regards, Markus_g -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 9:57 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation I've made the revisions, http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~amha119/botany-bay-relation2.osm So I've used the multipolygon to make islands as inner, and left the other bays are separate bays. After I get this working I can then try to turn Congwong Bay at the East into an area, and then it can be debated if that is separate, or part of Botany Bay. I'll upload this one tomorrow if there are no further objections or suggestions. ___ 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] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
Okay, I've just moved the bay tags to multipolygon, and added that small way that closes Bare Island to the multipolygon. I've left the ABS tags on the outer way, because that is what they are attributing, the location of the nodes on that way. The fact that the outer way forms Botany Bay I know from local_knowledge, hence I don't see why the mulitpolygon should be attributed to ABS. I also just added the straight coastline that crosses the entrance to the bay. On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Markus_g wrote: > Almost. > > 1) Bare Island isn't a closed way. But that can be easily fixed. > 2) Remove the tags from the outer way of Botany Bay and label the > multipolygon with name=Botany Bay natural=bay attribution=ABS > > Regards, > > Markus_g > > -Original Message- > From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org > [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey > Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 9:57 PM > To: OSM Australian Talk List > Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation > > I've made the revisions, > http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~amha119/botany-bay-relation2.osm > > So I've used the multipolygon to make islands as inner, and left the > other bays are separate bays. After I get this working I can then try > to turn Congwong Bay at the East into an area, and then it can be > debated if that is separate, or part of Botany Bay. > > I'll upload this one tomorrow if there are no further objections or > suggestions. > > ___ > 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] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation
Looks good. Good call on the ABS tags as one of the inner islands isn't ABS. Regards, Markus_g -Original Message- From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey Sent: Monday, 11 October 2010 9:00 AM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation Okay, I've just moved the bay tags to multipolygon, and added that small way that closes Bare Island to the multipolygon. I've left the ABS tags on the outer way, because that is what they are attributing, the location of the nodes on that way. The fact that the outer way forms Botany Bay I know from local_knowledge, hence I don't see why the mulitpolygon should be attributed to ABS. I also just added the straight coastline that crosses the entrance to the bay. On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Markus_g wrote: > Almost. > > 1) Bare Island isn't a closed way. But that can be easily fixed. > 2) Remove the tags from the outer way of Botany Bay and label the > multipolygon with name=Botany Bay natural=bay attribution=ABS > > Regards, > > Markus_g > > -Original Message- > From: talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org > [mailto:talk-au-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Harvey > Sent: Sunday, 10 October 2010 9:57 PM > To: OSM Australian Talk List > Subject: Re: [talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation > > I've made the revisions, > http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~amha119/botany-bay-relation2.osm > > So I've used the multipolygon to make islands as inner, and left the > other bays are separate bays. After I get this working I can then try > to turn Congwong Bay at the East into an area, and then it can be > debated if that is separate, or part of Botany Bay. > > I'll upload this one tomorrow if there are no further objections or > suggestions. > > ___ > 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 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Brisbane Openstreetmap Meetup Monday October 18th @ Grange Library
Hi everyone, Only 1 week to go until the next mapping meetup. Please let me know if you plan on attending. - David On 4 October 2010 20:49, David Dean wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Brisbane OSM propaganda follows. Please let me know if you don't want > to receive these emails in future. > > - David > > --- > Calling all map-lovers, amateur cartographers, surveyors and > cartophiles! There’s a friendly meetup of OpenStreetMappers in > Brisbane soon, and we hope to have a few interested newbies thrown > into the mix. > > When: Monday 18th October 2010 18:30 - 22:00 > Where: Grange Library - 79 Evelyn Street, The Grange, Qld, 4051 > Web: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brisbane_Mapping_Meetups > > OpenStreetMap is a collaboratively built free map of the world, with > simple wiki-like editing; think ‘Wikipedia’, but for maps. The result > is highly detailed digital maps, created and edited by local > communities, that are free to reproduce without the normal commercial > restrictions. It's a fun project to get involved with; you'll > discover how maps are made and uncover the geographical secrets of > your neighbourhood. > > Volunteers from all around Brisbane have already begun mapping the > roads, footpaths and cycleways across the city, but now we need your > help to improve your local area by adding street details and amenities > such as restaurants, parks, playgrounds and shops. > > If you have a laptop, bring it along and we'll show you how easy it is > to use OpenStreetMap on your own computer. Internet access will be > available through shared mobile broadband and library Wi-Fi (Brisbane > Libraries membership required). > > You are welcome to map however and wherever you want, but here are a > few ideas for the evening: > > * Fix OpenStreetMap errors in your local area > * Help add roads and other features using aerial imagery > * Put your house (and your neighbour’s) on the map > * Improve suburb boundaries > * Share your local knowledge to add points of interest (POIs) > * Experiment with OpenStreetMap map-making and editing tools > * Swap tips on using OpenStreetMaps to navigate on your mobile > phone or GPS device > > However, if you aren't sure what you can do, we'll be happy to provide > ideas and help get you started. > > We have the meeting room booked from 18:30 to 22:00, but feel free to > turn up within those times whenever you like. We’re trying to organise > some alcoholic (and otherwise) drinks for the meetup, and we'll > probably order a few pizzas on the night. If you are coming, please > bring $10 to help pay for this. > > If you can come, please let David Dean know before the event, so we > can have some idea of how many drinks to take on the night. > > Contact David Dean on 0407 151 912 to RSVP or for more information. > > -- > David Dean > Post-Doctoral Fellow, RP-SAIVT, QUT > (me) http://www.davidbdean.com > (saivt) http://www.bee.qut.edu.au/projects/saivt/ > (post) Room S1101, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Australia 4001 > (p) +61 7 3138 9329 (m) 0407 151 912 > (CRICOS) 00213J > -- David Dean Post-Doctoral Fellow, RP-SAIVT, QUT (me) http://www.davidbdean.com (saivt) http://www.bee.qut.edu.au/projects/saivt/ (post) Room S1101, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Australia 4001 (p) +61 7 3138 9329 (m) 0407 151 912 (CRICOS) 00213J ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
