[talk-au] Fwd: Importing Vicmap Lite data
Hi Simon, Yes I'm aware of the dangers of just breaking things with a mass of automated data. I was going to start with one boundary, and potentially just trace it to avoid importing problems. But I assume all those IP issues also apply to tracing? The problem with boundaries is they are pure data. You can't see them on the ground or from the air. So surely they are impossible to do without accessing government data. Russell On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Simon Poole wrote: > > > Am 14.12.2015 um 03:17 schrieb Russell Edwards: > > Hi, > > I just wanted to double check before I do this as people seem to talk > casually about using Vicmap Lite data but the OSM Wiki has a long process > to go through with the community before doing any imports. > > > It should be pointed out that the rules are there for a reason: a decade > of experience that imports are in general screwed up and the people > responsible for them then vanish leaving a mess behind for others to clean > up. > > > I have downloaded "Statewide Public Land Classification boundaries, > polygon - 1:250,000 to 1 :2 million. Vicmap Lite". It is CC > BY-4.0-International. > > > Currently the status of CC BY-4.0 licensed data is unclear, this is due > to some quirks in how the 4.0 version of CC BY works. We are waiting for CC > to get back to the OSMF to clarify. which might happen in this decade or > not. In other words: such data will need explicit permission for an import. > > I want to add boundaries of some local state forests I frequent, using > this data. My questions are > > * Can I just go ahead and do it? > * I haven't done boundaries before, do I need a shared node where roads > and waterways cross the boundary? > * What if there is an existing overlapping area natural=wood that follows > the aerial tree extent (which doesn't exactly match the boundary)? Leave > them both there? Do I need natural=wood on the state forest boundary area > to, to make it display green? What about the conflict there? > * Anything else to watch for? > > Landuse imports are notoriously difficult to do correctly, matter of fact > I'm fairly sure that we have never had one which wasn't a failure in one > way or another. If you have never done boundaries before then you should be > doing boundaries before. That will give you some idea of what you are > getting in to and will give you answers to your questions. > > Simon > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: Importing Vicmap Lite data
Hmm, thanks Andrew and Ross. I've read through those emails and a few more now hmmmph, more fuel to the fire of my long-held hatred of IP. Do you have any suggestions what other source to use for public land boundaries? What do commercial map companies do - pay for the data? There is frequently no visible sign of a boundary on the ground or in aerial imaging. Ross-- on the "wood" area vs the forest area, yes, the existing area covers the tree cover visible on aerial imagery - so it extends sometimes kilometers beyond the state forest border, but also has holes in it for major clearings and firebreaks within the state forest. What's the best thing to do with that? I notice Macedon Regional park has the park as one area, and adjoining treed areas outside the park as separate areas - maybe that's best rather than overlapping them? Russell On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Ross wrote: > As Andrew pointed out explicit permission is required to import/trace etc, > data you do not own. It's part of the contributor terms of osm. > > http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms > > This basically says "if you don't own the data then you have permission to > use it". > > Otherwise as below: > > > On 14/12/15 12:17, Russell Edwards wrote: > > Hi, > > I just wanted to double check before I do this as people seem to talk > casually about using Vicmap Lite data but the OSM Wiki has a long process > to go through with the community before doing any imports. > > I have downloaded "Statewide Public Land Classification boundaries, > polygon - 1:250,000 to 1 :2 million. Vicmap Lite". It is CC > BY-4.0-International. > > I want to add boundaries of some local state forests I frequent, using > this data. My questions are > > * Can I just go ahead and do it? > > Probably not as you don't have explicit permission. > > * I haven't done boundaries before, do I need a shared node where roads > and waterways cross the boundary? > > No > > * What if there is an existing overlapping area natural=wood that follows > the aerial tree extent (which doesn't exactly match the boundary)? Leave > them both there? Do I need natural=wood on the state forest boundary area > to, to make it display green? What about the conflict there? > > Yes but it's going to depend on the actual boundary. It may be that there > is a firebreak and someone has traced the wood outline but the boundary is > actually about 5metres away. Maybe have a look at doing one area and post > a link to get feedback from others. > > > * Anything else to watch for? > > Don't join boundaries to things that are not boundaries. > > Cheers > Ross > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing > listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Importing Vicmap Lite data
Hi, I just wanted to double check before I do this as people seem to talk casually about using Vicmap Lite data but the OSM Wiki has a long process to go through with the community before doing any imports. I have downloaded "Statewide Public Land Classification boundaries, polygon - 1:250,000 to 1 :2 million. Vicmap Lite". It is CC BY-4.0-International. I want to add boundaries of some local state forests I frequent, using this data. My questions are * Can I just go ahead and do it? * I haven't done boundaries before, do I need a shared node where roads and waterways cross the boundary? * What if there is an existing overlapping area natural=wood that follows the aerial tree extent (which doesn't exactly match the boundary)? Leave them both there? Do I need natural=wood on the state forest boundary area to, to make it display green? What about the conflict there? * Anything else to watch for? I might have a look at Vicmap Hydro to get the creeks as well. Thanks in advance Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
Could I ask a newbie question on this topic? I want to update some roads that are 4wd-only in certain sections. Any "new approach" aside, what is the best way to do this -- a) what tag do I use, and b) how do I handle the changing traversibility - separate ways linked as a route, or... ? Thanks in advance Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 65, Issue 24
Sigh. We really need a blanket policy of PD for government publications in AU. On 22/11/12 16:52, nicholas.g.lawre...@tmr.qld.gov.au wrote: > Hi all, > > Mike from TMR got in touch with me this morning reversing his > statement about using tourist route information on local council > maps, see below. I haven't used them to add anything to OSM anyway. > "Hi Wil, > > Unfortunately your posting on Open Street Map has caused me some grief! > > It seems I was not correct in thinking that the maps I provided as > reference material in PDF form can be freely used. Those on my GIS > section with a greater understanding of copyright matters have > decreed that copyright does actually exists over this information > and therefore it cannot be made available to Open Street Maps. > > , one of my GIS associates, can provide more information on > copyright matters pertaining to this data if you wish to discuss > possibilities but it seems likely that it will not be possible to > use this data in the way you envisaged in the short term at least. > You can reach on . > > My apologies for the confusion, but would you please update your > posting to withdraw the expectation that the route marking > information I provided can be made available to Open Street Map > > Kind regards, > > Mike" Just to clarify, I am the that was redacted. :-) Cheers, Nick *** WARNING: This email (including any attachments) may contain legally privileged, confidential or private information and may be protected by copyright. You may only use it if you are the person(s) it was intended to be sent to and if you use it in an authorised way. No one is allowed to use, review, alter, transmit, disclose, distribute, print or copy this email without appropriate authority. If this email was not intended for you and was sent to you by mistake, please telephone or email me immediately, destroy any hardcopies of this email and delete it and any copies of it from your computer system. Any right which the sender may have under copyright law, and any legal privilege and confidentiality attached to this email is not waived or destroyed by that mistake. It is your responsibility to ensure that this email does not contain and is not affected by computer viruses, defects or interference by third parties or replication problems (including incompatibility with your computer system). Opinions contained in this email do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, or endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure. *** ___ 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] scenic routes
I guess for copyright reasons you would actually need to go and read the street signs instead of tagging out of a copyrighted book or file? Russell On 2012-11-08 00:02, wil ly wrote: Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] The OSM ladder
Maybe I'm missing something but surely it depends not only on the radius of curvature of the track but also the width of the tunnel. It has been bugging me that ways have no width in OSM. But I suppose the alternative would be very hard to manage. Secondly, even if you don't trust the path marked when inside the tunnel .. you could at least work out a minimum radius of curvature based on the heading of the tracks as they join each end of the tunnel. Russell On 16/10/12 18:40, Nick Hocking wrote: Actually, I've just had a go with a 50 metre "stick insect" in JOSM and it is REALLY touch and go (or is that touch and stay). Nick ___ 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] NSW Alphanumeric at last..
It depends how it's implemented. It can be a major pain in the backside if there is a conflict between a) the name you know b) the name the sign says and/or c) the name a service such as Google Maps says. (Or d) electronic signs warning of roadworks on some random route number on such and such a date.) If they consistently give, say, the old name and the route number in brackets, that would be fine. That's not my experience of it in Vic, though. Names are more memorable than numbers Cheers # 9827. On 27/09/12 18:24, Ben Johnson wrote: Yay Best. News. Ever. Just saw it on Channel 9 news. I can't believe the state Labor opposition labels this a "waste of money"... given they endorsed it years ago and spent the last 10 years erecting road signs all over NSW with the MAB routes already on them, and covered them all with temporary cover-plates. Idiots. The 9 News report says we'll see the new names starting to appear in January, and will be complete by the end of 2013. BJ On 27/09/2012, at 3:17 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote: At last.. http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/ms-and-bs-to-make-driving-simple-as-abc-minister-20120927-26n4w.html We should be completely ready to go by March 2013, I think. Not clear how long the transition will be. Ian. ___ 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] GPS accuracy
On 24/09/12 05:50, John Henderson wrote: But I see it operates only for straight lines. I was hoping it'd average GPS traces downloaded from OSM in JOSM around corners and curves. That would be a big ask, I know. Yep -- that's next! Shouldn't be too hard to implement the TopoFusion algorithm linked to from here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Average_tracks (famous last words!) With my crappy phone GPS at least, though, the result would still be a lot worse than you'd get tracing from well-aligned high-res imagery. I suppose if nothing else though it could be a less fiddly way of creating something to try to align the imagery too. Sigh -- this OSM thing would be so much easier if we had perfect positioning (or even WAAS). Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] GPS accuracy
On 22/09/12 10:20, Ben Johnson wrote: That is absolutely fantastic - cant wait to see it. BJ It should be available now if you tell JOSM to download a new plugin list. It's called GPSBlam. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/GPSBlam Please tell me it works as it was a bit of a black art getting it up into the repository! Cheers Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] GPS accuracy
Hi all, On this topic -- for what it's worth I have written a JOSM plugin to help with GPS accuracy in the case of having multiple tracks covering the same . You can highlight a set of GPX tracks along a straight path (or taken from a fixed position) and it will a) average them all to find their geometric centre and b) find the direction of maximum variation, to find the likely direction of the path along which they were recorded. I hope to have it available within the next week or two. You should get an accuracy improvement factor of equal to or greater than the square root of the number of tracks. When you have dozens or hundreds of tracks on the same paths, as I do (logs from my runs around town), then it should be a great help in pinning down any offset in the imagery (and potentially, rotation, too). Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Misaligned streets OSM or Bing wrong? - use survey mark?
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 1:17 PM, 4x4falcon wrote: > > Actually I have to ask also why are you tracing from bing imagery when you > have gps traces and should be adding them as source=survey > Is that not the done thing? GPS traces are usually 5-15 m in error in a random direction. Bing's pixels are about 20 cm wide. So I assumed Bing would be a much better option as long as it is aligned properly? Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Misaligned streets OSM or Bing wrong? - use survey mark?
GDA94 to WGS84 is approx 45 cm from what I read but it will be affected by continental drift. GDA is fixed to points on the Australian plate so GDA coordinates will not change (much) but I guess OSM is really meant to be in WGS84. Just an update to this thread in case anyone is interested, I re-did the survey mark coordinate conversion and found it within 1 m of the bing image. So it seems bing is correctly aligned and numerous streets in my town are misplaced in OSM, with nearmap marked as source. Pretty handy resource: http://services.land.vic.gov.au/landchannel/content/SurveyMarkMarkSearch Russell On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ian Sergeant wrote: > >> But an even bigger error can be caused by using different projections. I > >> forget which one OSM uses, but using different projections can move a > given > >> point 20m quite easily, and a survey marker may well be on a different > one. > > > Can we get a definitive answer on this? > > I think the terminology is a little confused. The projection is the > way that a the 3D shape is projected onto our 2D representation. It > shouldn't "move" a given point on an elipsoid, but the 2D > representation of it may be quite different. That really shouldn't > effect what we are doing here. > > Perhaps we are talking about the conversion from AGD to GDA. Last > time I looked there were still some maps of some areas using the old > datum, which can result in this kind of separation. Just separated > enough to make you think you know what you are doing, and at the same > time get very lost. > > However, I very much doubt that is the case here. I think the survey > mark is using the GDA. > > As to how accurate the location of the survey marks is, I have no > idea. I think it would depend on the technology available at the time > the mark was last surveyed. Lets face it, once we are talking about > 2m errors, the sources are numerous, from parallax on the photo, to > surveying errors, to GPS errors. > > Ian. > > ___ > 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] Misaligned streets OSM or Bing wrong? - use survey mark?
> > > As far as tweaking other people's edits... if you're confident with your > > accuracy, I'd just do it. But if you want to take a more cautious > approach > > you can contact the original editor and ask whether they mind you > tweaking - > > or at least ask what method they used to position their nodes and let > them > > know you can make it more accurate for them. Keep in mind there are many > > "inactive" users who move onto other hobbies after a while - so if you > don't > > hear back from somebody after a reasonable time, consider it fair game to > > change it. > > > > Again, well done for going through this thought process, and welcome! > > > > BJ > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On 01/09/2012, at 8:11, Russell Edwards wrote: > > > > Hello -- brand new user here, please be patient :). > > > > I am trying to improve OSM in my home town. I notice that many/most OSM > ways > > are approx 5-10 m west of where Bing has them. > > > > Most either have nearmap or nothing as a source. There are no GPS tracks > to > > download. I could make some but they're usually in (random) error by > about > > the same amount anyway. > > > > I tried to check against the coordinates given for a survey mark in town, > > through http://services.land.vic.gov.au/maps/lassi.jsp (with conversion > to > > lat/lon with http://www.gracode.com/mapgrids.php ) ... this also had the > > Bing map out by about 10 m... but southward! > > > > Help! Three inconsistent systems - Bing, OSM and the survey mark. Which > if > > any should I trust at the 1-m level? > > > > Is there a tool for averaging GPS tracks? There are roads I have run > along > > dozens of times with a GPS track for every run. Maybe with averaging it > > could get to the 1m level of accuracy. > > > > (Yeah yeah, don't sweat the small stuff... I just can't stand seeing > streets > > running through people's front gardens...) > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > Russell > > > > ___ > > 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
[talk-au] Misaligned streets OSM or Bing wrong? - use survey mark?
Hello -- brand new user here, please be patient :). I am trying to improve OSM in my home town. I notice that many/most OSM ways are approx 5-10 m west of where Bing has them. Most either have nearmap or nothing as a source. There are no GPS tracks to download. I could make some but they're usually in (random) error by about the same amount anyway. I tried to check against the coordinates given for a survey mark in town, through http://services.land.vic.gov.au/maps/lassi.jsp (with conversion to lat/lon with http://www.gracode.com/mapgrids.php ) ... this also had the Bing map out by about 10 m... but southward! Help! Three inconsistent systems - Bing, OSM and the survey mark. Which if any should I trust at the 1-m level? Is there a tool for averaging GPS tracks? There are roads I have run along dozens of times with a GPS track for every run. Maybe with averaging it could get to the 1m level of accuracy. (Yeah yeah, don't sweat the small stuff... I just can't stand seeing streets running through people's front gardens...) Thanks in advance Russell ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
