Re: [talk-au] Usage of Openstreetmap at EMSINA

[Adam Steer]

Hi Graeme - this is exactly what I was thinking about in my question
earlier - make mapping part of the job. Also great to hear OSMAnd+ in
there (my choice of personal navigator for offline missions in both
Australia and Norway )

Also want to touch on a point Ewen made. I was at Taylors crossing
(Vic, on this patch:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-36.8418/147.6456) in the
2019/20 summer. No EMS is coming there - and comms are super flaky
between Benambra and Corryong - that whole region. A lot of common
ground with the linked talk. It makes a lot of sense to spend EMS time
mapping things that are relevant for offline use later - IMO far more
effective use of funding than infrastructure which then needs
protecting to support apps / services which may fail offline.

Relevant to this, I'm looking for the next career, I'd be super happy
to work on this stuff - and likely back in Au sometime in January 23.

Cheers

Adam

On Tue, 13 Sept 2022 at 06:27, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
>
> Carrying on from this discussion, just spotted this mentioned on Discord: 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgk9al1rluE
>
> Very interesting, especially in regard to what we were talking about!
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 23:49, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>>
>> A really great thread. Sometime early this century, the Victorian CFA used 
>> local brigades to confirm mapping. This became the original 
>> paperbasedSpatial Vision Maps. We now have the Common Operating Platform or 
>> EM-COP that does much the same as Graeme's QFES above but has a proprietary 
>> basemap.
>>
>>It works really well and allows updates by the Fire Behavioural Analysts 
>> (FBANS) and other Intel staff, BOM staff, warnings officers and  local 
>> incident controllers as well as strike team leaders commanding 4 or so fire 
>> tankers.
>>
>> Now, if we could not put transmission towers on top of hills because there 
>> is one flaw in all of this.
>>
>> Ewen
>>
>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 10:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
>> wrote:
>>>

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Usage of Openstreetmap at EMSINA

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Carrying on from this discussion, just spotted this mentioned on Discord:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgk9al1rluE

Very interesting, especially in regard to what we were talking about!

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 23:49, Ewen Hill  wrote:

> A really great thread. Sometime early this century, the Victorian CFA used
> local brigades to confirm mapping. This became the original
> paperbasedSpatial Vision Maps. We now have the Common Operating Platform or
> EM-COP that does much the same as Graeme's QFES above but has a
> proprietary basemap.
>
>It works really well and allows updates by the Fire Behavioural
> Analysts (FBANS) and other Intel staff, BOM staff, warnings officers and
> local incident controllers as well as strike team leaders commanding 4 or
> so fire tankers.
>
> Now, if we could not put transmission towers on top of hills because there
> is one flaw in all of this.
>
> Ewen
>
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 10:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 29 Aug 2022 at 20:42, Michael Collinson  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  I'll ask a mate in the Victoria CFA.
>>>
>>
>> Son has a mate in Qld RFS so got him to ask last night.
>>
>> "It's a QFES app for iPads, that's slowly rolling out to RFS as well.
>> Fully interactive, they can draw fire fronts over a map and other units can
>> see it in real time. Prior to that though, they get around by GPS and mud
>> maps"
>>
>> No more info than that, but if it's on an iPad, I'd assume it's using
>> Apple Maps? & I believe Apple are starting to use OSM info?
>>
>> I know that when the fires were all happening, there were a lot of
>> complaints that the publicly-accessible QFES maps were woeful, with regard
>> to location & frequency of being updated, & they made the comment that they
>> use a much better system themselves "but it would be too complicated for
>> civilian viewers to understand"! :roll eyes:
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
> --
> Warm Regards
>
> Ewen Hill
>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] add boundary=forest tag to Qld State Forests and Timber Reserves

[Little Maps]

> Nev, great initiative. I’ve been contemplating how the new boundary=forest 
> could be used in Vic and S NSW. Rather than view it a tag to use in addition 
> to land use=forest, I saw it as a useful replacement.

> By replacing landuse=forest with boundary = forest, we could generate State 
> Forest (SF) tenure boundaries, similar to conservation reserves, and remove 
> all ambiguity about whether landuse=forest infers a vegetation type 
> (forest/wood), a landuse (forestry) or a tenure (State Forest). (It means all 
> 3 things to different people). We could then accurately map SF tenures 
> independent of vegetation type and (perhaps?) the finer-scale mapping of 
> actual landuse.

> We could also more accurately map vegetation types in SFs, whereas atm, it’s 
> a complete mess to map scrub, grassland, etc in SFs, especially where they 
> cross SF boundaries. Also, it clearly acknowledges that only a small part of 
> many SFs is actually used (and can be used) for timber production.

> It seems to me we have a fantastic opportunity to greatly reduce the 
> horrendous vagaries that are implicit in landuse=forest across Aus SFs if we 
> use boundary=forest to apply to tenure, and natural=wood, scrub, etc to apply 
> to the vegetation type, within SFs. In reality, we have little way of mapping 
> which parts of many SFs are available for logging unless we import far more 
> detailed datasets from gov agencies.

> I look forward to other thoughts on the matter. Cheers Ian

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] TomTom - OSM Collaboration

[William Ireland]

Hi everyone,
Thank you all for your informative and welcoming responses so far! We have 
taken all your suggestions and concerns on board and shared them internally. 
Please continue to watch this space and we will be sure to communicate all 
details of the upcoming projects. Again, please feel free to raise any further 
ideas to this email trail.

For those who are interested, I will be hosting an open discussion meeting on 
Microsoft Teams on Thursday, 15 September 2022 from 2-3pm (AEST Time) for OSM 
Members. Feel free to join and discuss potential new collaboration ideas or to 
raise any thoughts or questions. Meeting invitation details are below:

Meeting ID: 352 839 577 627
Passcode: LMhZkV

Thank you again,
Will

From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2022 9:03 AM
To: William Ireland 
Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] TomTom - OSM Collaboration

You don't often get email from 
graemefi...@gmail.com. Learn why this is 
important

Hi Will

On Wed, 7 Sept 2022 at 10:14, William Ireland 
mailto:william.irel...@tomtom.com>> wrote:
Some initial ideas include but are not limited to providing leads from media 
sources extracted by our web scraping tool or locating missing highways from 
new housing developments.

We would love to hear from you. What do you think of these ideas?

 I brought it up on Discord, & concerns were raised over whether we can legally 
use "scraped" data, due to licensing copyright etc?

And are there any other areas where you need assistance or fields we can 
collaborate on?

A couple of suggestions that were made were

1. Perhaps getting higher quality, more frequent, more wide-spread street view 
360 imagery; &

2. Using your influence, which is probably greater than OSM itself, to try to 
convince various Federal & State Govt departments to allow us access to their 
data

Thanks

Graeme

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] add boundary=forest tag to Qld State Forests and Timber Reserves

[Nev W]

Yes, happy to add produce=timber to the State Forests. Timber Reserves not 
productive yet and may be used otherwise in future.

Interesting that landuse=forestry should not be used on relations. Most state 
forests are mapped as multipolygon relations.
I prefer to leave landuse=forest for now, but do prefer to change to 
landuse=forestry if OSM contributors decide that is most suitable solution.  

> On 12 Sep 2022, at 4:55 pm, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> If intended to produce timber then 
> 
> produce=timber
> 
> Also consider a duplicate with landuse=forestry ... see 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dforestry 
>  This is an 
> attempt to get away for the 'tree cover' use by others. 
> 

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] add boundary=forest tag to Qld State Forests and Timber Reserves

[Warin]

On 12/9/22 14:57, Nev W wrote:
Hi, I want to check the boundaries of the Qld State Forests and Timber 
Reserves which are included in the Protected areas of Qld dataset of 
2022 which we have explicit permission to use.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources#Queensland
Both boundaries are legislated under the Forestry Act 1959.

The tags I intend to use are as follows, and introduce the new 
boundary=forest tag which will hopefully be rendered on the Standard 
layer with more use:


attribution=Queensland Department of Environment and Science
boundary=forest
governance_type=government
landuse=forest
name=xx State Forest or Timber Reserve
operator=Queensland Department of Environment and Science
protection_title=State Forest or Timber Reserve
ref:paoq:sysintcode=3406TBF001
source=Protected areas of Queensland - boundaries - 2022
type=boundary (for the multi-polygons only)



If intended to produce timber then

produce=timber

Also consider a duplicate with landuse=forestry ... see 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dforestry This is an 
attempt to get away for the 'tree cover' use by others.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au