[talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. The river (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.50134lon=150.8778zoom=15layers=M ) currently has both a riverbank area drawn, and a way down the middle of the river. To make things even more complicated, the way running down the middle of the river has both waterway tags and administrative boundary tags. I'm thinking the ideal way to map this (reaches + river + admin boundary) would be split the way into segments for each reach, tag each segment as waterway=reach, name=Foo Reach, then collect up the river segments into a relation which contains waterway=river, name=Bar River, and just leave the riverbank area as is. Not sure what to do with the admin boundary tags though. I'm not sure what's best though. Any thoughts? Thanks. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
On 9 April 2011 18:22, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. To do this I would shift the river specific information to a relation, which is useful in any case since you can then lump all parts of the river into the same relation and then the individual segments can be tagged differently. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 18:22:49 +1000 Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. The river (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.50134lon=150.8778zoom=15layers=M ) currently has both a riverbank area drawn, and a way down the middle of the river. To make things even more complicated, the way running down the middle of the river has both waterway tags and administrative boundary tags. I'm thinking the ideal way to map this (reaches + river + admin boundary) would be split the way into segments for each reach, tag each segment as waterway=reach, name=Foo Reach, then collect up the river segments into a relation which contains waterway=river, name=Bar River, and just leave the riverbank area as is. Not sure what to do with the admin boundary tags though. I'm not sure what's best though. Any thoughts? Thanks. I'd be looking at another word for reach. I'm not making any suggestions, but it isn't a simple English term, and using difficult terms makes the cross-language stuff hard. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
The historical map I'm getting the information from calls them ... Reach. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reach_%28geography%29 Most generally, a reach is any length of a stream between any two points. I can't think of a better term myself, so unless there are any other suggestions I'll use reach for the time being. On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 18:22:49 +1000 Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. The river (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.50134lon=150.8778zoom=15layers=M ) currently has both a riverbank area drawn, and a way down the middle of the river. To make things even more complicated, the way running down the middle of the river has both waterway tags and administrative boundary tags. I'm thinking the ideal way to map this (reaches + river + admin boundary) would be split the way into segments for each reach, tag each segment as waterway=reach, name=Foo Reach, then collect up the river segments into a relation which contains waterway=river, name=Bar River, and just leave the riverbank area as is. Not sure what to do with the admin boundary tags though. I'm not sure what's best though. Any thoughts? Thanks. I'd be looking at another word for reach. I'm not making any suggestions, but it isn't a simple English term, and using difficult terms makes the cross-language stuff hard. ___ 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] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
Hi, 'linear network water flow' should suffice. ... it's been recommended to tag it as 'directional=yes' where it's just a line in the direction of the water. .. if it's unknown 'directional=unknown'. You could put 'oneway=yes' but don't let the talk-ca list know about it as some people will get all excited about it. ... it'll just add a nice arrow across the river, and make it look good. cheers, sam On 4/9/11, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: The historical map I'm getting the information from calls them ... Reach. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reach_%28geography%29 Most generally, a reach is any length of a stream between any two points. I can't think of a better term myself, so unless there are any other suggestions I'll use reach for the time being. On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 18:22:49 +1000 Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. The river (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.50134lon=150.8778zoom=15layers=M ) currently has both a riverbank area drawn, and a way down the middle of the river. To make things even more complicated, the way running down the middle of the river has both waterway tags and administrative boundary tags. I'm thinking the ideal way to map this (reaches + river + admin boundary) would be split the way into segments for each reach, tag each segment as waterway=reach, name=Foo Reach, then collect up the river segments into a relation which contains waterway=river, name=Bar River, and just leave the riverbank area as is. Not sure what to do with the admin boundary tags though. I'm not sure what's best though. Any thoughts? Thanks. I'd be looking at another word for reach. I'm not making any suggestions, but it isn't a simple English term, and using difficult terms makes the cross-language stuff hard. ___ 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 -- --- Across Canada Trails - Beyond 2017 - The National Trails Network Victoria, BC Canada Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blog: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: 'Sam Vekemans' Member, CommonMap Inc. http://commonmap.org/ IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #CommonMap Also find us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap resolution in JOSM
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Nathan Odgers n.p.odg...@gmail.com wrote: Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I use JOSM (3966) on OSX (10.6.7) and the high-resolution Nearmap imagery over Sydney is very poor quality compared to what I get in Merkaartor. Nearmap in Merkaartor is nice and sharp at high-zoom, whereas it's much more pixellated at about the same zoom level in JOSM. Not quite sure why this is, in JOSM, because as far as I can tell, I've configured everything correctly, and I have the maximum zoom level set to 26. Not sure if this happens in Windows or other OSs. Any ideas? Is this a known issue, or am I just doing something wrong? There are two max zoom level settings. In Preferences, under the Imagery Preferences (left tab), under Settings (top tab), under TMS Settings make sure the Max zoom lvl is something larger than or equal to 24, then under the Imagery providers tab make sure the zoom in the zoom column is again = 24. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
On 09/04/11 16:28, John Smith wrote: On 9 April 2011 18:22, Andrew Harveyandrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. To do this I would shift the river specific information to a relation, which is useful in any case since you can then lump all parts of the river into the same relation and then the individual segments can be tagged differently. Agree and include the river banks as part of the relation. Leave all the admin boundary out of it and remove any waterway tags from the admin boundary. You should not need the river way down the middle if the river banks have been mapped. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
On 10/04/11 12:23, 4x4falcon wrote: On 09/04/11 16:28, John Smith wrote: On 9 April 2011 18:22, Andrew Harveyandrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river. To do this I would shift the river specific information to a relation, which is useful in any case since you can then lump all parts of the river into the same relation and then the individual segments can be tagged differently. Agree and include the river banks as part of the relation. Leave all the admin boundary out of it and remove any waterway tags from the admin boundary. You should not need the river way down the middle if the river banks have been mapped. Bearing in mind reach is also the nautical term for a tack, is it worth considering Andrew's source map might be documenting the lines of sailing between navigation markers (or indeed landmarks) which are no longer even well-known? [Disclaimer: I-am-not-a-sailor.] They may not even document current-day navigation channels, if that part of the river required dredging to keep such open in the past. In other words I am wondering whether it might be best to add the new names completely independently of both the waterway and the administrative boundary. Maybe create a tag like waterway:navigation, perhaps for the new feature, perhaps? Justification for independence: these things are straight segments which rationalise a natural (i.e. curved) waterway for boating purposes... therefore are not the waterway itself. Similar argument for them not being the administrative layer (although they might be - can this be checked in any way?) My 2c. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 13:23:57 +1000
{withheld} pheasant.cou...@gmail.com wrote:
Bearing in mind reach is also the nautical term for a tack, is it
worth considering Andrew's source map might be documenting the lines
of sailing between navigation markers (or indeed landmarks) which are
no longer even well-known? [Disclaimer: I-am-not-a-sailor.] They may
not even document current-day navigation channels, if that part of
the river required dredging to keep such open in the past.
In other words I am wondering whether it might be best to add the new
names completely independently of both the waterway and the
administrative boundary. Maybe create a tag like
waterway:navigation, perhaps for the new feature, perhaps?
Justification for independence: these things are straight segments
which rationalise a natural (i.e. curved) waterway for boating
purposes... therefore are not the waterway itself. Similar argument
for them not being the administrative layer (although they might be -
can this be checked in any way?)
My 2c.
Stuck in my mind is Madmen's Bend at Hay, which refers to a part of
the river, and it is not a /reach/, but also warrants its name
recording as the sign nearby is recording the name.
http://billiau.net/zoph/photo.php?album_id=144_order=date_off=1246
Have we got some other word for the smaller part of the waterway?
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] OSM-F seems to be a sinking ship... (was: Wiki + Data Sources + Licensing Categories)
On 9 April 2011 09:09, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 April 2011 20:47, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 April 2011 16:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Despite your attempts to sidetrack this discussion from the your data import to some wider OSM licencing issue, I won't be sidetracked here. The problem is no one seems to want to answer the hard questions, everyone that should be dealing with these issues just seem to want to ignore them and hope they stopped being asked. I don't wish to seem to be picking on you personally, however someone needs to man up and take responsibility for their choices or change where OSM-F is headed if the positions are unsupportable with facts. And the silence continues. As I said before Ian, I'm not personally looking to pick on you or anyone for that matter, but those that made specific choices don't think they should justify themselves and give straight answers to straight questions. It's starting to become painfully obvious that OSM-F wouldn't be able to organise a piss up in a brewery, and there seems to be little or no chance that they can actually pull off the license change over in some kind of demotactic, moral and smooth change over so I'm basically writing them off for all future edits as a complete waste of time. A couple of us are toying about with what to do next, fosm.org seems the most suitable at present since the idea is to continue on with CC-by-SA licenses, although there is still debate over which CC-by-SA license due to issues with the European Database Directive, but that doesn't have any effect on us in Australia until and unless the Australian government decides to do something similar if Telstra et al push now that copyright doesn't protect their data. What do others think, or have planned if OSM-F keeps heading into the lost cause territory? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM-F seems to be a sinking ship... (was: Wiki + Data Sources + Licensing Categories)
On 10/04/11 13:14, John Smith wrote: On 9 April 2011 09:09, John Smithdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 April 2011 20:47, John Smithdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 April 2011 16:58, Ian Sergeantinas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Despite your attempts to sidetrack this discussion from the your data import to some wider OSM licencing issue, I won't be sidetracked here. The problem is no one seems to want to answer the hard questions, everyone that should be dealing with these issues just seem to want to ignore them and hope they stopped being asked. I don't wish to seem to be picking on you personally, however someone needs to man up and take responsibility for their choices or change where OSM-F is headed if the positions are unsupportable with facts. And the silence continues. As I said before Ian, I'm not personally looking to pick on you or anyone for that matter, but those that made specific choices don't think they should justify themselves and give straight answers to straight questions. It's starting to become painfully obvious that OSM-F wouldn't be able to organise a piss up in a brewery, and there seems to be little or no chance that they can actually pull off the license change over in some kind of demotactic, moral and smooth change over so I'm basically writing them off for all future edits as a complete waste of time. A couple of us are toying about with what to do next, fosm.org seems the most suitable at present since the idea is to continue on with CC-by-SA licenses, although there is still debate over which CC-by-SA license due to issues with the European Database Directive, but that doesn't have any effect on us in Australia until and unless the Australian government decides to do something similar if Telstra et al push now that copyright doesn't protect their data. What do others think, or have planned if OSM-F keeps heading into the lost cause territory? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au At the moment I'm tending to fosm.org as it seems the most compatible with what I've been doing. Having said that I'm still watching commonmap.org etc as well. And considering setting up my own private server for Au only data for my own use. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM-F seems to be a sinking ship... (was: Wiki + Data Sources + Licensing Categories)
On 10 April 2011 15:29, 4x4falcon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: At the moment I'm tending to fosm.org as it seems the most compatible with what I've been doing. Having said that I'm still watching commonmap.org etc as well. Well from a license point of view, all commonmap data should be usable for fosm.org too, there is already some code to handle osm.org v fosm.org conflicts so I can only assume this could be expanded for commonmap as well. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
