Re: [OSM-talk-ie] What are your 'must map' features?

[John Sturdy]

I like getting overhead power lines and underground pipelines when I can
spot them on aerial photos, along with substations, pumping stations and so
on.
Also, swimming pools and tennis courts tend to stand out (on aerials,
again), so I map those when I see them.
__John

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 12:26 AM Colm Moore  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> So, for whatever reason, some of us are interested in specific localities
> or projects, e.g. minutely mapping a whole village or neighbourhood, all
> the roads in a county or perhaps something more specific, e.g. mapping all
> shops in a chain or technical, e.g. I do a fair bit of debugging of
> disconnected roads.
>
> There are some features that I feel I 'must' map, e.g. if something has a
> reference number (road, bus stop, rubbish bin (Dublin City Council has
> them)), I want to map it. I *really* like mapping / filling in details on
> electrical transformers (I'm the most recent editor of 2,274 of 2,285
> transformers mapped in Ireland). I can smell them at 50 metres! :) Or
> rather, I've mapped so many I can tell in a neighbourhood where I am likely
> to find one.
>
> I also run scripts through Over-Pass Turbo a few times a month, searching
> for police stations, post office infrastructure and power facilities that
> need their tagging improved. I also map pipelines & storage  tanks. I've
> mapped lots of railway, but there are relatively few feature left to map.
>
> Most of the time, mapping driveways an houses bores me.
>
> Colm
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can
> change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead
> ___
> Talk-ie mailing list
> Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
>
___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

Re: [Talk-GB] Public Rights of Way data for Cambridgeshire

[John Sturdy]

It's interesting to compare their approach with that of the capital of what
used to be one of the most closed countries: the Municipality of Tirana
(Albania) is now putting (some of) its data online voluntarily, in
co-operation with the local hackerspace.

http://opendata.tirana.al/

They haven't seen the need to provide an English translation of the pages,
but many of the subject area titles are guessable without knowledge of
Albanian, and Google Translate knows Albanian.

I've been working with the Tirana hackerspace in mapping parts of the
country, and when I commented it would be nice to get plans of the
underground Cold War bunker complex that now houses the exhibition
"Bunkart", one phone call was enough to arrange access to the data (not yet
processed, though).

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Dave F  wrote:

> Great Scott! Like wading through treacle. I admire your perseverance.
>
> Did you ever get a reason as to why they were being so restrictive? Empire
> building? 'Knowledge is power?'
>
> After seeing the long list of other local authorities who had released
> their data you'd have thought they would realise they were being a bit
> siliy.
>
> Not only time, but /so/ much money wasted.
>
> Dave F.
>
>
> On 11/05/2017 00:20, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>
>> After a rather long battle...
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] the steepest residential street in England

[John Sturdy]

North Lane in Bath (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/2955824#map=19/51.37754/-2.33364) is very
steep, but only side entrances to houses open onto it, so I'm not sure
whether it counts fully as residential.

__John

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:42 AM, Dave F  wrote:

>
> On 12/01/2017 01:02, Robert Norris wrote:
>
>> Ffordd_Pen_Llech is steep but it's one way (down), so if you're looking
>> for challenge to go up it on your bicycle you have to do so illegally.
>>
>> Apparently Vale Street (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32024547) in
>> Bristol is meant to be very steep, but I don't know the incline. (Doesn't
>> seem to have incline posted looking at GSV. DaveF: Was this the road you
>> were thinking of or something in Bath?)
>>
>
> Just outside:
> https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3977312,-2.2940096,3a,88.4
> y,62.25h,61.15t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sedHvMRtPcF5jZw2uQdD4Hw!2e0
>
> It may not be the steepest, but it gives your calf muscles a good work
> out. That bend in the road is the real killer on a bike.
>
> DaveF
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] web page element browsing history regression

[John Sturdy]

To me, the current version certainly seems like a step back; I
presumed either it was done to meet some other requirements, or I had
just stupidly missed finding how to do what I wanted, so I didn't say
anything at the time.  In particular, ISTR it being much easier on the
previous version to go from looking at your edit history, to having a
particular changeset displayed centred in the slippy map and zoomed to
fit.  When mapping, I often want to come back to wherever I was last
editing, and although it doesn't take that long to find something by
panning and zooming manually, it was nice to have it done
automatically.

I've just looked a bit further at this, and found that while the link
from a mapper's edit history no longer brings the slippy map to the
right place, the link from a friend's most recent edit on my profile
page does take me there.  The puzzling bit is that the two links are
the same!

__John


On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
 It's been some time now that the new web page is deployed, and despite the 
 overall improvement, the regression for object browsing (tiny part of the 
 screen is actually useful, map occupies most of the screen but is really not 
 needed or could be much smaller at least, the current presentation style 
 leads to scrolling requirement for any slightly more complex object) is 
 still bothering the users. Also dates and times are not shown any more, 
 instead there is approximated text like almost 6 years ago, 12 months 
 ago etc.

 I don't know if I'm the only one have this issue : browsing from a
 changeset to one of the list objects (way or node) does not update the
 map view (firefox). So I have to zoom and move the map manually making
 this web object browsing hard to use. This was not the case in the
 past.

 +1 for the dates. Maybe something nice on the screen but not
 something required by people using it. I'm just asking myself if the
 devs really identified our needs with this object browser. The
 previous version was maybe not so nice but really useful. Now we
 have to move the mouse on each entry to see the date details
 (especially when all of the history show you the same text...). Is it
 an improvement ?

 I understand that this is an open source project with volunteer 
 contributions, but that part actually WAS already functional for years. 
 Would it be possible to get the old browsing and history pages back, at 
 least until someone comes up with an improvement?

 Maybe not a rollback but clearly, the current version is a downgrade
 compared to what we had before (at least for those people who are
 really taking a close look in data) and it's not evolving since then.

 Pieren

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

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

[OSM-talk] New mapping satellite

[John Sturdy]

Announced in typical Register style:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/13/creepy_satellites_will_be_able_to_zoom_in_on_your_face/

I expect it'll be some time before images become available for OSM, though :-(

And I'm not confusing resolution and accuracy!

__John

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Incorrect speed limit anonymous notes - who is behind that?

[John Sturdy]

I wonder whether these incorrect speed limit notes might not be
reporting that the speed limit on the map isn't what it is on the
road, but someone objecting to what the speed limit on the road is,
and making a token protest about it?


On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:24 PM, JB jb...@mailoo.org wrote:
 Have a look  there:
 https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/486
 If categories are create (and I think they should), I would still add
 private notes/heavy duty work
 JB.

 Le 10/08/2014 14:10, Matthijs Melissen a écrit :

 I see a lot of comments like this. The underlying problem seems to be
 that it is not clear whether notes are meant for armchair mappers, or
 for surveyors in the field.

 I think both types of notes are useful: that way the notes can serve
 as a two-way communication between mappers in the field (for example
 novices who don't know how to edit the map themselves) and armchair
 mappers (who might want to communicate with mappers in the field if
 they are unable to do a field check themselves at that moment).

 So the solution might be very simple: make two types of notes, 'desk'
 notes and 'field' notes. The desk notes can be handled by armchair
 mappers. The field notes need a check in the field. Notes created by
 anonymous users should be desk notes by default, and if information is
 missing, the armchair mapper should be able to turn it into a field
 note.

 The notes JB refers seem to be field-type notes. I think they are
 useful, and I think it's not helpful if armchair mappers try to close
 all of them without doing a survey.

 Anyone think a split in field and desk notes is a good idea?
 Implementation of this should be easy.

 -- Matthijs

 On 10 August 2014 11:50, JB jb...@mailoo.org wrote:

 Hello,
 I think I will reopen the debate here, by asking a simple question: how
 many
 of those saying hey, let this note open, it does no harm to anybody
 have
 actually browsed a country for its opened notes and tried to close them?
 How
 many have done the same with openstreetbugs during its last year of life?
 If you have not, let me tell you, loud and clear: the note database will
 become unusable soon. When you browse 10 notes and are forced to leave 9
 open because it does provide no clean information, you just stop trying.
 That is why during OSB close up, I found so many notes of that kind
 (continue the path, this is wrong, this does not exist, etc.), that where
 just not clear enough, or where just too old (the correction had been
 done
 without OSB), and most of them where more than 2 years old. And this is
 why
 OSB was a mess in the end.
 I have tried to keep the DB clean in France, am still trying by beeing
 less
 narrow-minded, but I just see its quality decreasing every day.
 So I do not have the exact number, but adding some 10s of little valued
 notes every week saying this speed limit may be wrong, some of them
 added
 by error (not along a highway) does not seem an improvement to the notes
 DB
 to me.
 JB.


 Le 10/08/2014 09:42, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :

 Il giorno 09/ago/2014, alle ore 13:56, Norbert Wenzel
 norbert.wenzel.li...@gmail.com ha scritto:

 just seeing these notes along a
 motorway every few kilometers. And since these messages don't tell what
 the actual speed limit should be and where it starts it gets really
 annoying to close all these automatically generated notes.


 why are you closing them, if you can't solve the issue? I would keep
 them
 open, if you are not sure that the limit is correct in OSM

 cheers,
 Martin
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



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

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



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

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

Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation

[John Sturdy]

I hadn't known (or remembered) that recommendation from the wiki; but
still, the Ukrainian spelling (resulting in a Ukrainian reader
understanding it as a reasonable phonetic imitation of the English
name) may often be very far from a transliteration (letter-for-letting
substitution) from the English name.  I'll put Towcester forward as an
example!  (For those not familiar with it: it's pronounced like
Toaster.)

__John

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Ed Loach edlo...@gmail.com wrote:
 Since English has non-phonetic spelling (and some placenames are
 particularly non-phonetic) there's no solid base for automatic
 transliteration to something meaningful in another script, so I
 think
 it's reasonable to put the Ukrainian spelling in explicitly, for
 places for which such a spelling is established..

 Perhaps in the cast of non-phonetic places there is some argument
 that such names could possibly be added, but looking at Pavlo's
 proposed cities I noticed Chelmsford which already has two Cyrillic
 language transliterations I feel would be better removed.

 There is a bit in the wiki which recommends avoiding
 transliterations:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Avoid_transliteration

 Speaking of an on the ground example, a few years ago I visited
 Crete and while all signs were in Greek, some of the tourist ones
 were also in a Roman script (I can't claim English - a name is a
 name). One particular place we wanted to visit we struggled to find
 on the map, and it was only when we were driving in the area we
 found that the translation from Greek in the guide book we'd read in
 advance, and the translation and the map and the translation on the
 sign post were three different translations. In this instance (if
 I'd been an OSM mapper at the time) I'd have added a name:en of what
 was on the sign, though as noted above it isn't technically en. I
 suspect the three different translations were transliterations of
 different ways it was pronounced.

 As far as I know Chelmsford has no cyrillic translations on their
 signs.

 Ed


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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Tagging of an area where Travellers live

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:20 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com wrote:

 I tag them landuse=residential residential=halting_site. This follows
 the frequent key=value value=subvalue scheme, account for the fact
 that a halting site *is* a residential area of some kind, and doesn't
 break data users that don't have a rule for halting sites.

I prefer this solution.

__John

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

[Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts

[John Sturdy]

No mention of OSM that I can see, though; a different kind of mapping:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23203500

http://www.arch.ox.ac.uk/hillforts-atlas.html


__John
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Usage of lanes / turn restrictions versus multiple ways when road is not divided

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:06 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.comwrote:


 What do people think of this:

 http://osm.org/go/0EQSJEoZT-- (aerial: http://binged.it/10kuDNm )

 and this:

 http://osm.org/go/eu6_VCkLp-- (aerial: http://binged.it/16js1Ye )


I like these (although the first one isn't quite optimal, I might have a go
at improving it soon); I'm thinking particularly of navigation for the
blind, where a lot of detail is useful.   It could also be useful for
people planning outsize load HGV movements.   I don't think it's too
cluttered; it's simply a complicated piece of road layout, and the map
reflects it.

__John
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik at zoom=19

[John Sturdy]

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Christian Quest
cqu...@openstreetmap.fr wrote:
 You can see what zoom level 19 looks like with Mapnik/cartocss style on
 http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=19lat=48.87206lon=2.30069layers=B

That looks excellent; I'm sure this would be useful on the main map.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Pronunciation of place names

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
 My friend Terence Eden has some interesting comments on documenting
 the pronunciation of place names, in this blog post:

 Can we solve the problem of how to do this, in OSM?

We could have a keyword convention for indicating the pronunciation
(in various languages) using the International Phonetic Alphabet; for
example, we could supplement name:language=* with
name:language:IPA=*

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik and (no) Buildings

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net wrote:
 Hi,

 I noticed that in the current render of Bremen there are quite a few
 buildings missing, especially some with tags like building=yes or
 building=terrace. Is this an error in the import or stylesheets?
 I don't think it's really intentional, is it?

The high-zoom re-rendering around
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.655291lon=-8.428702zoom=18layers=M,
where I have recently edited, is coming up blank, too.

Perhaps there's a server / renderer problem behind both of these?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
 On 10/12/2012 08:18, Kevin Peat wrote:


 On Dec 10, 2012 1:25 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote

 No. We should be mapping physical objects...

 There are plenty of non-physical objects mapped in OSM


 As primary tags?

Yes --- administrative boundaries, for example.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk] My first coastline question

[John Sturdy]

In the view around
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.21134lon=-10.35719zoom=16layers=M,
the road R549 seems to cross the coastline a few times.  I brought up
Potlatch 2 to try to fix this.  It turned out that the photo data
isn't available for part of that area, but I did notice that the
coastline way isn't the coastline that's visible on the slippy map
(which doesn't seem to have a way corresponding to it).  Is it just a
matter of waiting for a very occasional automatic update, or is there
something that needs to be fixed manually here?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] China's maps to be closely monitored for more accuracy - China Daily

[John Sturdy]

How long does it take to check a map of China for accuracy? ;-)

With the speed Chinese building companies can work at,  I reckon at
least one new city could be built in the time it takes to check the
whole map.

The check really seems to be that various points of contention are to
be shown in the official way,  rather than what cartographers would
call accuracy.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Shoud OSM Help move to Stackexchange community?

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:

 I don't think this is a good idea if it means that OSM users need to
 register another account to participate in help.osm.org.

+1

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] High Viz Jackets?

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
 Are the high viz jackets on sale anywhere?

 You used to be able to get them shipped internationally from
 Gravitystorm but the page is 404.

 I'm thinking of ordering a bunch, so if the jackets aren't available,
 maybe someone knows what kind of jacket they were, and has all the
 logos, etc. in a way that I could order new sets made?

A supplier I've used a while ago (not for OSM logos but other custom
printing) is here:

http://www.hivis.co.uk/hi-visibility/custom-printed-hi-vis.html

John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

[John Sturdy]

 [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Names_localization

+1, generally; but I'm not keen on deprecating the bare name=* tag,
because for many (perhaps most) named features, there is only one
name.  For example, a minor rural road in England will probably have a
name (in English), but it won't have names in other languages, and
no-one will really describe its name as its English name --- it's
simply its name.  Multiple names are really an issue for
multilingual countries and for major features (typically large cities,
rivers, and perhaps mountains) in monolingual countries, and I suspect
those are well under half of all the features that will ever be
mapped.

Having just suggested keeping it simple, I'll suggest a complication
as well: multiple scripts for the same language.  In particular, I'm
thinking of mainland China, as it opens up more to interaction with
the West; and, when I did an introductory course on Chinese language
and culture, my teacher said the Chinese people begin learning to read
and write using pinyin, rather than in Chinese script, so maybe we
should ask Chinese mappers whether they're interested in it being
convenient to have names in both.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref codes (WAS:Hampshire Rights of Way Data released under OS OpenData licence)

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Is it not sensible to use the reference format of the place you are in,
 rather than create some sudo standard?

 A web application I'm developing straddles many counties.  So I've decided
 to adopt the scheme:
   code-for-council:code-for-path-adopted-by-council

I think this is a way of doing what you suggest, i.e. using the
reference format of the place you're in (along with the necessary
indication of what place you are in).

An alternative would be to use the council's own code, and then in
another tag (or in a relation, see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Is_In)
indicating which county it is in.  But that seems a roundabout way of
doing it, harder both to use and to map.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote:
 Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer
 to us.

 http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/

 Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for
 all the effort, but it wasn't enough.

 Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that
 when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The
 fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific
 to beat us says enough.
 It's a win-win situation.

It looks like we're getting to the point where the closed-source
mappers are starting to see us as serious competition.

If the best they can do is that In one particular instance
(presumably chosen to make their point as well as possible) we've got
a third less residential road coverage and 16% less basic map
attributes we're well on the way (especially the second part of
that).

Also, having said that the community is a drawback for Open Source,
they then claim their community as an advantage!  I doubt that their
specialists really go out and check each correction that's sent in; I
expect we do more (implicit) checking, as vandalism is reported and
undone.

I wonder whether their comment on pedestrians and in city or town
centres can be taken as conceding that we're doing better than them
in those areas?

The nearest they make to an accurate point is classification of
footpaths as roads --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I
have found quite a few unclassified roads that look more like
tracks on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident
of it).

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote:
 To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and gravel, 
 it's a track...

The ones I reclassified typically had two wheel-tracks of soil-colour
and grass between them, I think.  If it's asphalt-coloured, even if
there is grass growing down the middle, I still call it a road.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: building=levels=N

[John Sturdy]

On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Worst Fixer worstfi...@gmail.com wrote:

 Also I propose removal of addr:housenumber=? on these objects, and move
 name=N to addr:housenumber=N.

I think that should be done only when the name=N is actually a number.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Post boxes!

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Rob Nickerson
rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:

 Was thinking more along the line of asking him is he minds us using his
 photos to add the extra details to OSM (e.g. ref numbers, collection times,
 and royal cyphers).

Or we could invite him to sign up to OSM himself!

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Transcription and internationalization in place names

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello, this is a great topic!

 There is one more issue with internalization and names. Users tend to add
 more than just names in name=* tags.
 For example Lago di Garda. If a machine tried to turn that into English,
 it would be Lake Lago di Garda, which is not right because lago already
 means lake. Fortunately, mappers put international tags, and the english one
 name:en says Lake Garda. But now, if a machine isn't carefull it could say
 lake Lake Garda.
 Also it doesn't feel right to put Lake in front of all the lakes in the
 World. A machine should do that.

 Also lots of mappers put School in school names, Airport in airport
 names, Bay in bay names, and so on..

 My question is, should the renderer join lake, school and airport with
 their names? I think that would make users put in cleaner data.

I think that words like lake, school etc are part of the name, and
should be in the data, and the renderer should present the name just
as it is in the data.  I don't think a machine could get this right.
For example, not all named instances of natural=water are called
lakes in English (e.g. Windermere is a name in its own right, and
does not need Lake prepended to it).

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Associated Press article: Crowds create Wikipedia-style maps of the world

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Spod OSM spod...@gmail.com wrote:
 http://www.japantoday.com/category/lifestyle/view/crowds-create-wikipedia-style-maps-of-the-world?utm_campaign=jt_newsletterutm_medium=emailutm_source=jt_newsletter_2012-03-22_AM

Good -- they even mention it's data rather than just a map!

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update

[John Sturdy]

I started to work on Hampshire, but got the following request from a decliner:

I was wondering if you would mind refraining from 're-mapping' my 
contributions for the time being? I'm still in discussions  with the OSMF 
regarding re-licensing some of my contributions which come from a 3rd party 
source not compatible with the new terms.

 Obviously we hope to have concluded this work before the 1st of April 
 deadline. In the meantime the more of my contributions that are deleted means 
 more work for me to put right once we get the licensing sorted.

I think the time's getting close enough that I'll resume that work anyway.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Vandalism changeset

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Oliver O'Brien m...@oliverobrien.co.uk wrote:
 Hi

 This appears to be a vandalism changeset: 10947970
 Details: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10947970

 It would be great if there was a report obvious vandalism button on 
 Changeset information pages.
 I think we are being too nice if we assume that edits like this might be 
 someone new

Or perhaps it could be the sort of thing you get by trying to pan the
map while having a way selected, I've seen that before.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Vandalism changeset

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Odd Gustafsson odd_lars...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Yeah, adding: bridge=yes, foot=no, layer=5, oneway=-1 and surface=grass, to
 a road happens to me all the time ;)

Sorry, didn't look closely enough!  I just saw the odd-shaped road.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik slower than usual?

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
 Is it just me, or are there more timeout magnifying glasses than usual?

I've been getting that too.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Mapnik slower than usual?

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
 Is it just me, or are there more timeout magnifying glasses than usual?

I've been getting that too.

__John

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] Map Co-ordinates for towns, etc in UK

[John Sturdy]

The logical centre and the geometrical centre aren't necessarily
anywhere near each other --- for example, what is generally thought of
as the city centre of Cambridge UK is some way west of the crossing
point between the lines between the northmost and southmost, and
westmost and eastmost, points of the outline of the city.

(I tried drawing those lines a few years ago, they crossed in Mill
Road Cemetery, which makes it the dead centre of the city ;-) )

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Keeping tags generic (was: Wind turbines no longer rendered on mapnik layer)

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:

 grumble Why create a key generator:power_source rather than just use
 power_source.  power_source is much more generic so you could re-cycle it
 for things like district heating, but generator:power_source is only ever
 going to be used for generating stations, and needs a new column in the
 database. /grumble.   I think I just prefer more generic, re-usable keys
 rather than trying to invent a new one for each situation

Seconded heartily!

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Finding untagged dead-ends

[John Sturdy]

Something I'd like to have a way of highlighting, as I've been doing
quite a bit of electricity distribution mapping, is power lines /
minor_lines that end in something other than a transformer or pole.
(In fact, any non-power tags on a power line are probably suspect, but
one ending in an untagged node is likely to mean that it needs
completion.)

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Finding untagged dead-ends

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:

 I don't really see the value of a generic noexit=yes tag - it can and
 should be inferred from the network. But finding dead ends can be
 valuable for tagging the countless turning circles / cul-de-sacs that
 exist in post-war subdivisions in the US - like John mentioned.

After a bit more thought, I'm not even sure of the definition of a
dead end --- is a road that leads into a closed tree (or other graph)
of roads and dead end?  It does lead to other roads, but you can't get
out onto the wider road network without coming back along the same one
again.  For example, is
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4678941 a dead end?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Finding untagged dead-ends

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:

 I don't really see the value of a generic noexit=yes tag - it can and
 should be inferred from the network. But finding dead ends can be
 valuable for tagging the countless turning circles / cul-de-sacs that
 exist in post-war subdivisions in the US - like John mentioned.

After a bit more thought, I'm not even sure of the definition of a
dead end --- is a road that leads into a closed tree (or other graph)
of roads and dead end?  It does lead to other roads, but you can't get
out onto the wider road network without coming back along the same one
again.  For example, is
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4678941 a dead end?

__John

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-GB] License changeover - Important West Country update

[John Sturdy]

On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
 Contributor Guy has now accepted the new contributor terms and OSMI License
 View is already showing the new picture [1].

I had done some remapping in that area, before Guy agreed --- could
someone now revert those changes, please?  I've put them at the top
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GB_revert_request_log

Some of them have other edits on top of them by now, but those are
also remapping and can presumably also be reverted.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign

[John Sturdy]

I've started to remap an area that I don't know from first-hand
experience, as it's got a particularly high concentration of data that
was mapped by a decliner.  I'm remapping it from Bing (deleting old
data and re-tracing it) which means that I lose the road names.  I
don't think this is particularly satisfactory, I'm just doing it so
there won't be a gap from the switchover date.

I've realized from doing this (and from guessing I won't be the only
remapper working this way) that it might be worth re-instating the
noname option to the slippy map, for a period around the changeover
date (perhaps from around now, until remapping has largely been done).

Any thoughts on this?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:

 It looks like you've picked Exeter - a place I was also considering
 looking at when chance permits.

Yes, I've started on Exeter.

Don't let my having started on it put you or others off doing
likewise!  I picked an arbitrary starting point and am working out
from there (if you want to minimize chance collisions of remapping).

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:

 It looks like you've picked Exeter - a place I was also considering
 looking at when chance permits.

The main decliner in the Exeter area has now accepted, so much less
need now.  I'll try to get my changes in that area reverted.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Spagehtti junctions in Cambridge and St Ives

[John Sturdy]

I've looked a bit further into disabled access to crossings, and
raised it on the accessability mailing list, and found that there is a
proposal to map crossing islands already
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Traffic_island).

After mailing about this, I then realized that it might be good to
mark routes through a crossing (particularly for the type of traffic
island which has two crossings onto it that aren't opposite each
other); and someone on the accessibility list found that crossing is
already used as a way as well as as a node.

__John

___
Talk-gb-midanglia mailing list
Talk-gb-midanglia@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-midanglia

Re: [OSM-talk] proprietary keys and values, machine readable vs. humans

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:

 the concept seems to be documented here:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/UUID

I don't see any mention of what should happen to UUIDs attached to
ways, when ways are split or merged.  Should this be coded explicitly
in editors?  In which case, it makes sense to push all such external
linking tags to use UUIDs, so that they are handled consistently when
the map is edited, without editors having to make special provision
for all known external linking tags.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] proprietary keys and values, machine readable vs. humans

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:

 Importing is difficult enough to do properly and I think updating that data is
 even more difficult to do.

I think it would make more sense for some kinds of data (particularly,
the more volatile ones) to have map servers that can gather data
from multiple data servers (i.e. OSM and whatever the imports would
otherwise have been from) and combine it to present it as a single
data stream (probably in an OSM-defined format).

Similar ideas have been in use in bioinformatics for some time now;
for example, see http://www.biodas.org/wiki/Main_Page (DAS is
Distributed Annotation Server).  Perhaps we could get ideas from them.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM-EU 2012 ???

[John Sturdy]

I'd be interested in attending such a meeting; possibly in helping to
organize, depending on where it's hosted.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] How I got here - was Geocaching.com moved to OSM (partly)

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
 One problem I'd see around here is that this kind
 of data is not very stable (usually the dead remain only for 20 years
 in their graves, not for eternity, but this depends on the religion
 and local culture).

In ordinary UK churchyards and other cemeteries, the graves remain for
centuries, and there are some gravestones and tombs still in place
from several centuries ago.

 Keeping this data in a separate layer is suboptimal: e.g. you will
 have tombs in OSM and the graves in them in another layer, now if
 someone moves the tombs (to improve the position) they would move the
 dead out of their tombs. Very bad for your karma...

I remember, from working on a project to encourage local authorities
to use free / open source software, that there are specialized
software packages for cemetery management.  (These were a sticking
point / excuse for inertia in FLOSS adoption, as they ran only on
Windows.)  It might be worth looking for existing standards as to what
data is kept.  There might also be existing databases that would be
available for import (although I gather some of the OSM community
isn't keen on bulk imports, but these will at least be fairly local).
And perhaps local authorities who are starting to use OSM might be
interested in using it to store their cemetery data.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Request for Romano-British features

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:

 For something like this, where there is very limited overlap between past
 and present, it makes sense to use a separate database. But in cases where
 most of the features still exist, such as railways or Roman roads, it's
 silly to duplicate the effort between databases (or somehow require everyone
 improving a way in one to upload it to the other and fix all intersections).

Agreed.

As long as the tagging used is such that things that no longer exist
are not normally rendered (and only show as thin outlines on standard
editors) I think including historic data shouldn't be a problem.
Compared with the amount of modern (current) data, there's not
really that much of it, anyway, so its effect on the storage
requirements is going to be fairly small; and we still meet the
requirement of the most accurate map of what is current.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Pigging potlach ...

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:

 Also, can you describe the freeze? ...

 As Richard (albeit fairly bluntly) said, we've not heard similar
 reports from other people, but they might just be silently enduring
 it. Any further help you can give us to get to the root cause would be
 awesome.

The slowdown I notice is on a single-core 512Mb machine, and I haven't
looked into full system statistics for it but the behaviour is
consistent with thrashing virtual memory... after editing for a while,
drawing ways with the mouse gets very slow (almost freezes); I think I
found the browser process had got very large, but I can't remember.  I
just guessed that the code to search for whether the mouse was
currently on an existing node was looking through more stuff than
would fit in RAM, that was what the behaviour felt consistent with.
I can investigate further if you like, but are people concerned with
such small machines (other than as thin clients) these days anyway?
(It might be of concern for mappers in poor countries getting
second-hand machines, for example.)

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Pigging potlach ...

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:

 I think there's always been a memory leak there with P2; I've noticed that
 sort of behaviour for months. I've only done minimal bits of delving into
 it, but suspect it's a case of _either_ some sprites being left on the
 display list (maybe the invisible sprites which P2 uses to define hit
 zones for each way/node), or that the event listeners by which Flash
 responds to mouse clicks (and other events) aren't being cleared properly.

Something like one of those would be consistent with what I'm seeing.
It doesn't happen on a larger machine, so I don't think it's just a
matter of the hit zone algorithm scaling poorly.

 Unfortunately it's not trivial to debug - I think this sort of thing is the
 way that Adobe makes their money from Flash (i.e. you need to buy Flash
 Builder for the profiling tools). But that's not to say it's impossible, and
 I'd very much like to do so.

Another oddity I've noticed (also probably deep within Flash) is that
P2 sometimes either doesn't respond to a keypress but does to the
corresponding mouse click, or just responds much slower to the
keypress.  (I notice this with add in advanced mode, versus the +
key.)  But I guess that by its nature Flash is more mouse-oriented
than keyboard-oriented, so this may be inherent to Flash rather than
specific to P2.

 (Incidentally, one simple thing you can do to speed P2 up is to clear any
 GPS traces you're no longer using - it's easy to forget that you have, in
 effect, a whole bunch of 1000-node ways sitting around!)

I don't think that's what's happening here (I get the effect without
any GPS traces loaded).

 I can investigate further if you like, but are people concerned
 with such small machines (other than as thin clients) these
 days anyway?

 Please do. I am interested, definitely - P2 should aim to run efficiently on
 any machine :) (and it's not entirely altruistic, as one of the machines I
 use regularly is a 2004 PowerPC Mac).

Next time it does it, I'll run top and get the process size, memory
usage, etc, for a start.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Michal Migurski m...@stamen.com wrote:
 On Dec 28, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

 I should be more specific: this person goes to maps.google.com, they see a 
 big map with a search box, they enter an address and pan around to look at 
 their house or hometown. They go to openstreetmap.org, and they see a big map 
 with a search box so they assume OSM is filling the same need. It's clear 
 from your mails that you think OSM fills a lower-level, more data-oriented 
 need so we should *change our public presentation to fit what we're actually 
 trying to do.*

I think we need to keep the big map with a search box quite
prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly because
that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give them a way to
evaluate the quality of our data (reading an XML file in an editor
isn't an easy way of seeing whether we cover a particular area well).
We should make the availability of the underlying data visible by
drawing attention to it *in addition to* the rendered maps, not
instead of them --- perhaps a textual link on the front page to the
downloads page.

For example, we could re-write OpenStreetMap is a free editable map
of the whole world. (on the front page) to something like
OpenStreetMap is an editable map of the whole world, freely available
both as displayable map and as underlying data.  We could add a
Data link to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Planet.osm to the
list that currently has:
Help Centre
Documentation
Copyright  License
Community Blogs
Foundation
Map Key
as it currently takes quite a bit of searching (from a newcomer's
knowledge) to find the Planet page on the wiki.

 I'm a little tired of people like that and I hope that by drastically 
 reducing the amount of map on our front page we will get rid of them.

The problem is, that that might get rid of a lot of other people, too.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Moderating / Quality checking OSM contributions -- was: Re: OSmosa.net run now.., contribution model

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote:

 I agree with you when a large amount of new people start the quality
 can go down.  My theory is there needs to be a certain ratio of senior
 mappers to new people to keep the quality high.  However I think as
 people learn how to fix their mistakes the quality will go up again
 and they will in turn be able to help new people avoid those mistakes.

Might this imply that when introducing (possibly large) groups to
mapping, it would be good practice to introduce a smaller group of
them first (perhaps a week or two before the main group), so that not
all of the group are beginners at the same time, but have some more
people (other than the instructors) to help them a bit?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Project Drake - mapping the University of Cambridge

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 4:08 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote:

 What do other people think? If there's a strong view not to have these
 parenthesised bits there, I'll take them out of the name tags.

I think it would be best to have the information somewhere, in a
consistent form (this probably means always using the same tag), but
for it not to be in the name tag.

I'm not sure what the tag should be, I don't think operator sounds
right.  Perhaps affiliation?  (I know someone with good knowledge of
CU formalities and terminology, and will ask him for suggestions.)

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Drinking Map of UK

[John Sturdy]

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 25 November 2011 10:02, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
. Yes, “Former Brewery” is the former
 Ridley’s site. Bishop Nick launched their first beer at The Compasses,
 Littley Green (next village over) recently; their old brewery tap. Not sure
 what the site used for now, but am about to change “name” to “description”
 as it has never been called “Former Brewery”.
 Maybe 'Former' in the name is a bit of a giveaway and I should filter those
 out of the tagQueries list

Yes, Former is probably unambiguous, but note that the Bushmills
distillery (Co Antrim, Northern Ireland) is called The Old Bushmills
Distillery although it is still their working distillery!

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Drinking Map of UK

[John Sturdy]

I'm sure this is a cider brewery, I've driven past it quite a few
times and remember seeing the signage.  (I used to live near
Limerick). I don't know of any beers from Bulmers, I'm pretty sure
they're only ciders.

__John

On 11/20/11, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:
 This was supposed to go to the list, sorry!

 On 20 November 2011 15:30, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,
 I am just looking through the BrewMap http://brewmap.maps3.org.uk
 tagQueries http://brewmap.maps3.org.uk/client/tagQueries.html page and
 am curious about the Bulmers brewery which is east of Limerick (
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/34929891).   Do you think it is
 safe to assume that this is a cider producer (industrial=cider), or do
 Bulmers brew beer too?

 Just trying to reduce the number on the list!

 Graham.


 --
 Graham Jones
 Hartlepool, UK.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Drinking Map of UK

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Borbus bor...@gmail.com wrote:

 distillery=whisky

 Do we need to make a distinction between whisky and whiskey?  I don't
 know much about whiskey, I seem to remember the difference is more than
 just spelling.

Whisky (Scottish) is distilled twice (and the smoke used to dry the
grain passes through the grain); Whiskey (Irish) is distilled three
times, and the grain is dried by heat, but the smoke doesn't pass
through it.  So yes, there is a difference, not much, but we might as
well map it.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Drinking Map of UK

[John Sturdy]

On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Graham
  the one
 or two vineyards in the South

There's some disgreement on how to tag these
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Vineyard),
between
  landuse=vineyard
and
  landuse=agriculture
  produce=grape

(I'm inclined to use the former.)

 and what do you call places where they make
 cider/perry?

press?

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Historic Features

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi All,
 I am interested in creating maps of historical features (e.g all roman
 remains, medieval things, World War 2 things etc.).

This could be extended to cover more everyday things, I suppose, but
that would require special attention by the ordinary renderers.  For
example, old routes of roads that have been re-aligned could be marked
with the usual highway=... and also with an indication of when it
went out of use.  However, to keep things simple for renderers (and
fewer tests in their code) it might be better to use some new key such
as historic_highway=

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] How to tag Police Memorial Trust (and similar) memorials

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
 I recently mapped a couple of Police Memorial Trust memorials, for example:

   
 http://www.policememorial.org.uk/Police_Memorial_Trust/PMT_Local_Memorials/PMT-Swindells-2004/PMT-Swindells-2004.htm

   http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.511667lon=-1.866628zoom=18layers=M

   http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1478159796

 with Tag:historic=memorial.

 I included the text on each memorial, tagged text. Would that be
 better tagged inscription, or with some other tag?

I've used commemoration on a couple of memorial benches in my
village, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1419167468, but
now you mention it, inscription sounds more generic, as there might
be inscribed public objects that aren't commemorative.

__John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Marker Posts

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Nicola Smith nicolasmit...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Hi  All,

 I appreciate it is something we don't necessarily map, but has anyone seen
 any gas/oil marker posts on their travels? I am interested in the
 sub-surface layout

Me too --- I've been mapping quite a few powerlines, and would like to
get pipelines but haven't managed to spot many.

 and wonderered if anyone had seen any markers that they
 could let me know about.

I noticed something on the road going north-east from Six Mile Bottom
(maybe around 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.1985273063183lon=0.28215765953064zoom=18
but I can't remember exactly), I think it was a white-and-orange
banded post; I've been meaning to go back and investigate.  There's a
gas compressor station fairly nearby
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.1847850084305lon=0.270532965660095zoom=18)
and I suspect it's connected with that.

At 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.2105194628239lon=0.259908735752106zoom=17
I found a water pipeline (which I've tagged; it's visible on
osmarender but not mapnik) as there's a marker sign (like the fire
hydrant signs, but blue) where it crosses the road, and there's a
marker post where it meets the track going southeast from the road.  I
traced it as far as I could from the bing photos, as it shows as a
disturbance in the fields.

There's some kind of pumping station at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.1787299215794layers=Olon=0.295938849449158zoom=17,
and I could see a faint mark on bing showing a pipeline leading to it
(again visible on osmarender).  I suspect that one's water, as it
leads close to the Fleam Dyke Pumping Station, which is a groundwater
extraction plant.

There's a big gas pumping station at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.4599286913872layers=Olon=0.842409431934357zoom=17
and again I managed to deduce a short section of pipeline from bing.

Any of these might be useful starting points for looking for posts.
I'll go back to the Six Mile Bottom road one in the next few days and
get the exact location (it's within a couple of miles of my house).

I also remember someone mentioning a gas pumping station near Duxford,
so that might be a good place to start looking around for posts.

__John

___
Talk-gb-midanglia mailing list
Talk-gb-midanglia@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-midanglia

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Marker Posts

[John Sturdy]

There's also a water pipeline heading northeast (again, visible on
osmarender) at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.2165490686893lon=0.0422796607017517zoom=17
-- I remember it being built (I used to live near there).  Again, I
traced it as far as I could from bing.

__John

___
Talk-gb-midanglia mailing list
Talk-gb-midanglia@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-midanglia

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixme: A proposal

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
 On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 06:56:51AM +0100, Ed Loach wrote:
 Nathan wrote:

  Would it make more sense to categorize by the tag? For example:
  *FIXME:name=yes
  *FIXME:maxspeed=verify that the entire road is 55 mph

 We don't need a proposal for this. It is such common sense that
 people do this already where it is appropriate (i.e. where more than
 one FIXME is needed on a single OSM element) :
 http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=FIXME#keys

 Its not common sense, its stupid. That way you make sure that your special
 fixme tag is not seen by tools that look for the normal fixme tag.

I think this reflects a problem with such tools, rather than with the idea.

 The value for the fixme tag is a free-text note.

Although there are many problems which don't fit neatly into classes
and are most simply addressed by a free-text note, that doesn't mean
that all problems are best addressed that way.

 You can just write:
 fixme=Not sure whether the name is right, verify maxspeed. Even better:
 If you are not sure about the name and maxspeed, delete those tags. Then
 its obvious that something is missing there and somebody will add it in due
 course. No special tags needed.

This particular example is one where I'd agree that the free-text note
is suitable; but there are some specific characteristics of problems
that I think are worth marking in a systematic (tool-readable) way; in
particular:
  things that need to be verified on the ground
  stubs
  approximated routes that need GPS surveying e.g. joining two stubs
that you know connect (perhaps rare)

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixme: A proposal

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
    FIXME=Do these roads join here?  Not clear on Bing imagery.  Survey needed.

 That will be a useful note for somebody planning to visit the area later so
 they can check this place if they wish.

How about starting a convention of using a tag fixme:survey_needed
with the details in the value string?

The only other subtype of fixme that I can think of immediately would
be fixme:incomplete, for long / hard-to-spot linear features such as
powerlines (where I've seen someone else was using fixme=incomplete
and have tried to follow that convention myself).

I like the idea of extending the NONAME layer to report fixmes, and if
we used a convention like fixme:survey_needed we could have a distinct
map symbol for that.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Fixme: A proposal

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:

 Only manually detected problems should be tagged with fixme. And it should be
 as easy as possible to mark those. Extra categorization would make it more
 difficult.

I don't think it makes it significantly more difficult, as fixmes
should have some kind of description of the problem.  Classifiying
them in the tags is just a more systematic way of doing that, which
makes them more amenable to higher-level tool use (e.g. someone could
write a program that identifies the areas with most density of
problems that need on-the-ground surveying... or even a route planner
that creates a route using highways tagged as approximate, for someone
to carry a GPS over, although the latter is probably stretching it a
bit).

 Why exactly do you want the extra categorization? What help would it
 be in your practical day to day work?

It's not just ease of tagging things with fixme that counts (although
it should be easy, and a plain fixme should always be acceptable);
ease of using (finding and fixing) the fixmes is also important.

 I can see one useful differentiation: Some problems are fixable only with 
 local
 knowledge (say a missing street name), some are fixable from afar (most
 topological problems). It might be helpful to not see problems needing local
 knowledge in areas where I don't have local knowledge.

I think it's also helpful for people to be able to plan problem-fixing
surveys efficiently.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Potlatch2 missing?

[John Sturdy]

The edit tab isn't working for me -- neither on my home machine, nor
if I ssh through to my work machine. (Both running iceweasel on
Debian, and I haven't reconfigured anything since it last worked for
me.) The slippy map and placename search seem to be OK.  Is anyone
else getting this?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch2 missing?

[John Sturdy]

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 8:43 PM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:

 What flash player are you using?  I seem to remember reading that FP 10 was
 needed now...

 ... ah - here we are:

 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/potlatch-dev/2011-September/001220.html

That'll probably be it; it's about time I updated my browser anyway.

Could the site put up a message if the wrong version of flash is
running?  Or perhaps most people will have seen the announcement
anyway?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] satellite Imagery missing

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:33 AM, kenneth gonsalves
law...@thenilgiris.com wrote:
 On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 10:49 +0200, Erik Johansson wrote:
  90% of my mapping is in such areas - gps, josm and repeated visits
 to
  the area are needed. Camera and laser range finder are a plus.

 Do you actually use an laser range finder, isn't that a bit hard to
 use? I would really like to hear how you use it, if not an extensive
 exposé then a shor one. :-)

 it is dead easy - just point it at the target and click - it gives the
 distance.

So do you get the distance from two known points, and triangulate by
distance, or do you use distance and bearing from one known point, or
something else?

And I'd be worried about being brought to the attention of the
authorities for being seen pointing lasers at infrastructural things
such as electricity pylons --- do people tend to complain about having
their buildings etc visibly surveyed?  (I'm a newbie at all this, my
only experience of potential problems has been that I could see that
people were wondering what I was doing when I was walking around
writing down house numbers.)  Or does a hi-vis jacket make it all
alright ;-) ?

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Helping mappers feel comfortable about their contributions / quality control

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:

  Even today, I would find it confusing to edit a group of objects which have
 source tags - it would be more intuitive to put the source in the changeset,

That makes sense to me --- surely most changes in a changeset will
have the same source.  Perhaps it could cascade / inherit, so that a
source attached to an individual object will override the source
of the changeset.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk