Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] Province / State borders

2009-03-31 Thread Adam Schreiber
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:59 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
 I've adjusted the boundary=admin rendering on my tile server to make
 more sense for North America.  Rendering the state / provincial borders
 at zoom 1  2 might be overdoing it, but at zoom 3 looks reasonable.  It
 does point out a potential shortcoming in the boundary data though.
 Borders for Vermont and New York appear bolder than for Minnesota and
 Illinois.  Have they been tagged differently, or duplicated?  Anyone
 have a border-checker script?

They weren't duplicated.  Ian (I believe?) imported the borders for
the New England and Mid-Atlantic states and I imported the rest.

Looking at my saved .osm files from the state boundary import,it looks
like they are tagged:
admin_level = 4
border_type = state
boundary = administrative
state:left = foo
state:right = bar

Cheers,

Adam



 See it here for part of North East. http://weait.com/maps very slow
 server/connection.

 Best regards,
 Richard


 P.S. My boundary hack.

    Rule
      Filter[admin_level]='4'/Filter
      MaxScaleDenominator5/MaxScaleDenominator
      LineSymbolizer
        CssParameter name=strokepurple/CssParameter
        CssParameter name=stroke-width1/CssParameter
        !--CssParameter name=stroke-dasharray4,3/CssParameter--
        CssParameter name=stroke-opacity0.2/CssParameter
      /LineSymbolizer
    /Rule



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


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


Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread Bill Ricker
  We should fix our fence.

Ayuh. Good fences make good naaybahs. [1]

 Shouldn't each
 border be a single way, with a relation for each adjacent region?

around whom does it go clockwise?

Shouldn't the entirety of a country's (state/province/county) be a
(multi)polygon for area?
Can that be emulated by relations, and would that be provided
abstraction or a pain in the punctuation for users of the data?

can the relation have a REVERSE option so that the entire outline can
be traced for a green's theorem planimeter area computation?

If there's an island between the lines, can it declare independence? [2]

 We should have a fence-mending party.

We want the fence nice and porous all summer  until after WorldCon Montreal. [3]

[1] http://writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/frost-mending.html
[2] http://isbn.nu/9780448054476
[3] http://www.anticipationsf.ca/

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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


Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread James Fee
Someone get the text to the Treaty of 1818 and figure that one out...  I
don't seem to have my copy ready by my computer.

--
James Fee
http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/


On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com wrote:

   We should fix our fence.

 Ayuh. Good fences make good naaybahs. [1]

  Shouldn't each
  border be a single way, with a relation for each adjacent region?

 around whom does it go clockwise?

 Shouldn't the entirety of a country's (state/province/county) be a
 (multi)polygon for area?
 Can that be emulated by relations, and would that be provided
 abstraction or a pain in the punctuation for users of the data?

 can the relation have a REVERSE option so that the entire outline can
 be traced for a green's theorem planimeter area computation?

 If there's an island between the lines, can it declare independence? [2]

  We should have a fence-mending party.

 We want the fence nice and porous all summer  until after WorldCon
 Montreal. [3]

 [1] http://writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/frost-mending.html
 [2] http://isbn.nu/9780448054476
 [3] http://www.anticipationsf.ca/

 --
 Bill
 n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

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


Re: [Talk-ca] gnis:reviewed=no map features

2009-03-31 Thread Alan Millar
 if you can put the list of features along with the corrisponding OSM
 tag to a wiki page, this would be helpful :)
 (then i can help match features  cross-check to what i have)

Unfortunately, in the case of my import for USGS Geonames items, they
don't have specific feature categories.  I'm doing subjective
classification based on the names.  In the source data, they are just
classified as building.  So to be more specific about what I am doing, I
will take a building named Oregon State Police and tag it with
amenity=police.  Unless it is named Oregon State Police Administration
Building, in which case I will tag it with amenity=public_building.  So
since I am not mapping discrete values, I don't think my list would be any
more useful on a wiki page than the exising Map_Features page.

FYI, although I'm calling this an import, mine is a semi-automated manual
process.  I'm doing this in a text editor on a file with one POI per line.
 I put in a value on each line for which tag I think it should have, which
as I said is a manual guessing process.  Lots of editor search-and-replace
type stuff.  I do have a little program to turn the text file into an osm
xml file, but other than that, it is not really automated.  I load the XML
file into JOSM, validate, and upload from there.

 i'm opting NOT to use the tag geobase:reviewed=no

Your reasoning sounds good.  I'm adding it to my load, because my tags are
so subjective.  I don't think the main USGS Geonames import needed it. 
Your plan should be fine, in my opinion.

- Alan



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


Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] Province / State borders

2009-03-31 Thread Ian Dees
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Adam Schreiber sa...@clemson.edu wrote:


 They weren't duplicated.  Ian (I believe?) imported the borders for
 the New England and Mid-Atlantic states and I imported the rest.


It might be the county border imports. I imported those without doing any
polygon-overlap-detection stuff. So they will probably overlap quite readily
in some places.
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread Bill Ricker
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Matthew Schneider
mlschnei...@bucketofbolts.net wrote:
 Great.  Which one's correct?

looks to me like they were traced with subtly different projections
that supposedly were squared up but didn't quite fit.

E.g., Interesting factoid i just picked up - Warsaw Pact and NATO used
the same primary meridians etc for their UTM grids, but minorly
different geoids, optimize for their areas of interest, so you can't
directly use one side'gmap posits to call artillery of the other  ...
or plot their textual minefield on your map.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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


Re: [Talk-ca] [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap in The Times - atlas of the world book

2009-03-31 Thread Nick Black
When you say listed, does it show an OSM map?  Or just name the project?

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Sam Vekemans
acrosscanadatra...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi all,
 i just wanted to let you all know that on page 57 of this big atlas
 book, openstreetmap is listed!
 (a big heavy book)
 So kids studing geography will see it!

 Its ISBN 978 0 00 7236701 - The greatest book on earth
 www.timesatlas.com
 twelfth edition 2007
 -it shows collaborative mapping of Bedford, UK

 This makes me excited because by the end of this year, all of Canada
 will be complete!

 Have a great day!

 Sam Vekemans
 Across Canada Trails

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




-- 
-- 
Nick Black
twitter.com/nick_b
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread James Ewen
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Matthew Schneider
mlschnei...@bucketofbolts.net wrote:

 Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!

 Actually, it is the 49th parallel, West of Lake of the Woods.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Treaty

Yup, 49 it is, but there are minor deviations along that line due to
measurement inaccuracies of the past.

You southerners had best remember though, who it was that burnt down
the White House on you... we might be the sleeping dog next door, but
we can bite you in the butt in a drunken stupor!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_Washington

James
VE6SRV

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


Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread Mepham, Michael
Stupid spell checker  GeoBase, not Georgia. 

The values in GeoBase for the US borders are from the International Boundary 
Commission and are consensus values for the internal boundaries. 


Mike Mepham

Federal/Provincial/Territorial Liaison
GeoConnections Program 
Natural Resources Canada

E-Mail:  mmep...@nrcan.gc.ca 
 
  Ottawa Regina

Phone: (613) 992-8549   (306) 780-3634
Fax:  (613) 947-2410   (306) 780-5191


- Original Message -
From: talk-ca-boun...@openstreetmap.org talk-ca-boun...@openstreetmap.org
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Tue Mar 31 00:15:40 2009
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Mepham, Michael
michael.mep...@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca wrote:

 Just accept what has been put into Georgia as the consensus solution,
 or go crazy trying to fix it!

Can you point us towards this Georgia of which you speak?

Somewhere there has to be a document that lists the metes and bounds
that describe the consensus solution. Better yet, a list of lat/long
points since that's what OSM plays with.

James
VE6SRV

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


Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread Brent Fraser
And for those who like to parse latitude and longitude:

http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/products.html#coordinates

Best Regards,
Brent Fraser
GeoAnalytic Inc.
Calgary, Alberta


Mepham, Michael wrote:
 Stupid spell checker  GeoBase, not Georgia. 
 
 The values in GeoBase for the US borders are from the International Boundary 
 Commission and are consensus values for the internal boundaries. 
 
 
 Mike Mepham
 
 Federal/Provincial/Territorial Liaison
 GeoConnections Program 
 Natural Resources Canada
 
 E-Mail:  mmep...@nrcan.gc.ca 
  
   Ottawa Regina
 
 Phone: (613) 992-8549   (306) 780-3634
 Fax:  (613) 947-2410   (306) 780-5191
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: talk-ca-boun...@openstreetmap.org talk-ca-boun...@openstreetmap.org
 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
 Sent: Tue Mar 31 00:15:40 2009
 Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders
 
 On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Mepham, Michael
 michael.mep...@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca wrote:
 
 Just accept what has been put into Georgia as the consensus solution,
 or go crazy trying to fix it!
 
 Can you point us towards this Georgia of which you speak?
 
 Somewhere there has to be a document that lists the metes and bounds
 that describe the consensus solution. Better yet, a list of lat/long
 points since that's what OSM plays with.
 
 James
 VE6SRV
 
 ___
 Talk-ca mailing list
 Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
 ___
 Talk-ca mailing list
 Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
 

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


Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread James Ewen
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Brent Fraser bfra...@geoanalytic.com wrote:

 And for those who like to parse latitude and longitude:

 http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/products.html#coordinates

Aha, the definitive source that I was asking about... Actual lat/long
values of the monuments. One would be hard pressed to dispute this
information. The IBC is the authority on the matter as far as I am
concerned.

James
VE6SRV

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


Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread James Ewen
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:47 AM, James Ewen ve6...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Brent Fraser bfra...@geoanalytic.com wrote:

 And for those who like to parse latitude and longitude:

 http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/products.html#coordinates

 Aha, the definitive source that I was asking about... Actual lat/long
 values of the monuments. One would be hard pressed to dispute this
 information. The IBC is the authority on the matter as far as I am
 concerned.

So, I checked out the monument at the SE corner of BC...

 M03140   MONUMENT 272 48 59 56.00114 04 01.96

That's in the NAD27 datum, so I translated that to WGS84

48 59 55.60  114 04 05.53

Then converted it to DD.

48.9988 114.0682

And looking at the corner of BC in Potlatch, highlighting the node,
and pressing L, I get:

49.9988 114.0685

That's pretty darned close...

Node 331773601 is even closer at 49.9988 114.0683, which might
actually be the monument location, and the corner of BC is computed
from that.

The end result, is that I would concur that the GeoBase borders are
much closer to the real world location than the manually input border,
or the USGS imports.

So, now we need to clean up the erroneous data.

The county outlines in the US are circular ways, the GeoBase ways are
not.Will it affect rendering by cutting up the US county circular
ways, and making them part of a combined way? Can I cut the GeoBase
ways at the Alberta, BC and US confluence, and then add in a bunch
more tags to the common borders? Can we tag the same way as a
border_type: state, and also border_type:international, then do
state:left, province:right, county:left, county:right, etc?

James
VE6SRV

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


Re: [Talk-ca] silly borders

2009-03-31 Thread Richard Weait
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 10:00 -0600, James Ewen wrote:
 The end result, is that I would concur that the GeoBase borders are
 much closer to the real world location than the manually input border,
 or the USGS imports.
 
 So, now we need to clean up the erroneous data.
 
 The county outlines in the US are circular ways, the GeoBase ways are
 not.Will it affect rendering by cutting up the US county circular
 ways, and making them part of a combined way? Can I cut the GeoBase
 ways at the Alberta, BC and US confluence, and then add in a bunch
 more tags to the common borders? Can we tag the same way as a
 border_type: state, and also border_type:international, then do
 state:left, province:right, county:left, county:right, etc?

I think relations are the way to go.  
Tag the way with the source, uuid and attribution. 
Split the way at each prov/state/county/regional municipality junction.
Add tags only at highest level relation for say, name, place,
population, ...
Include the way in Canada relation - boundary=admin, admin_level=2
Include the way in USA relation - boundary=admin, admin_level=2
Include the way in state/prov/muni/county relations as appropriate.



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


Re: [Talk-ca] Province / State borders

2009-03-31 Thread James Ewen
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:

 Borders for Vermont and New York appear bolder than for Minnesota and
 Illinois.  Have they been tagged differently, or duplicated?  Anyone
 have a border-checker script?

I see something similar near Emerson, MB.

Both are tagged as
boundary:administrative
admin_level:2

The thin line has a tag of:

border_type:country

Whereas the thick line has a tag of:

border_type:national

The thick line also has two relations:
boundary: United States
boundary: Canada

Whereas the thin line has only the additional single tag:
country:right:United States.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.00064lon=-97.2292zoom=16layers=B000FTF

Oh yeah, pay no attention to those other borders in the area... North
Dakota, Minnesota, Pembina County, Kittson County, and the correct
GeoBase border.

James
VE6SRV

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