Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
Hi, since you'd want to get a visitors pass anyway, it would be great to also say that you want to draw a polypon around the whole property & you want it as accurate as possable and also drawing in fence/wall if & where it is physically present. Marking gates at every entrance will help map users know to avoid the property & for someone to 'create a cycling route around around it using bikemap.net' :-) I hope this company is 'Western Forest Products', as many map users will be greatfull for this info :) The polygon could still be done after, but would be better to get a more accurate version of it. cheers, Sam On 6/4/10, Brent Fraser wrote: > >> My friend is very comfortable traveling around the property. I'm not >> so comfortable with his offer to take me around the property (he has >> an employee ID, I don't). The airspace overhead is not restricted (at >> least not any more than non-company property nearby), so the road grid >> information could be obtained from a small airplane flying overhead. >> Obtaining the street names from overhead would be a problem. The issue >> in my mind is the collection of GPS tracks (on the ground), >> would/could the employer object? > > Sure, they could do anything they like. The key to minimizing problems is > to > respect the company's ownership/right to use the land. I'd recommend asking > for > permission in writing (and get a response in writing). > > And get a vistor's pass for yourself (there could liability issues if you > don't). > >> Further could this sort of data >> collection cause any grief to Open Street Map? > > If you have their permission to be on the property, no problem with the data > collection. Since you are creating the data, there's no data ownership > problem. > > But I'm not a lawyer, so don't take the above as a professional legal > opinion... > >> I gather that some of the people living near the property do sometimes >> try to use the property as a shortcut route (and when caught are >> charged with trespass). Better maps would not help the trespass >> situation... >> >> >> Colin McGregor > > > ___ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > -- Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) @Acrosscanadatrails ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
> My friend is very comfortable traveling around the property. I'm not > so comfortable with his offer to take me around the property (he has > an employee ID, I don't). The airspace overhead is not restricted (at > least not any more than non-company property nearby), so the road grid > information could be obtained from a small airplane flying overhead. > Obtaining the street names from overhead would be a problem. The issue > in my mind is the collection of GPS tracks (on the ground), > would/could the employer object? Sure, they could do anything they like. The key to minimizing problems is to respect the company's ownership/right to use the land. I'd recommend asking for permission in writing (and get a response in writing). And get a vistor's pass for yourself (there could liability issues if you don't). > Further could this sort of data > collection cause any grief to Open Street Map? If you have their permission to be on the property, no problem with the data collection. Since you are creating the data, there's no data ownership problem. But I'm not a lawyer, so don't take the above as a professional legal opinion... > I gather that some of the people living near the property do sometimes > try to use the property as a shortcut route (and when caught are > charged with trespass). Better maps would not help the trespass > situation... > > > Colin McGregor ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Colin McGregor wrote: > [ ... wow, the attribution really got munged on this one. ] >> Still, the idea of touching base with his superior in the company >> before making the trip seems like a good idea to me. > > I'm with Gregory on this one. Don't ask the employee to do anything > uncomfortable. The roads, being private and access controlled can be > marked as so in OSM. My friend is very comfortable traveling around the property. I'm not so comfortable with his offer to take me around the property (he has an employee ID, I don't). The airspace overhead is not restricted (at least not any more than non-company property nearby), so the road grid information could be obtained from a small airplane flying overhead. Obtaining the street names from overhead would be a problem. The issue in my mind is the collection of GPS tracks (on the ground), would/could the employer object? Further could this sort of data collection cause any grief to Open Street Map? I gather that some of the people living near the property do sometimes try to use the property as a shortcut route (and when caught are charged with trespass). Better maps would not help the trespass situation... Colin McGregor ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Colin McGregor wrote: [ ... wow, the attribution really got munged on this one. ] > Still, the idea of touching base with his superior in the company > before making the trip seems like a good idea to me. I'm with Gregory on this one. Don't ask the employee to do anything uncomfortable. The roads, being private and access controlled can be marked as so in OSM. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Gregory wrote: > I don't think there should be any problems. > Unless it is a big super secret what the grounds are like, e.g. Area 51. Do > they also have the air space restricted to stop aerial photography? There are no airspace restriction. The property does have heavy equipment that when in motion could easily flatten automobiles who get in the way... > It's only roads, that will presumably be marked with access=private, not > like the company documents. > Ultimately it is how comfortably your friend feels. Is he allowed to wander > around(e.g. in his lunch break). Is he happy explaining that the GPS is just > recording his location of the road, and explaining the OSM project. It might > be handy to casually chat to a friend in his department about OSM, so if he > does get in trouble he can say call X who knows me and can say I work here > and what I'm doing. Friend is comfortable traveling around the property, very early in his career with the company he briefly worked on the property, before being promoted and moved to an office in a nearby city. He has been back since the promotion and as noted has been stopped by security. Friend's current role doesn't require that he know what is happening on the property, but he is part of a team that tracks what heavy equipment enters/leaves that property. His last visit was I gather to look at entrances/exits to the property (done on his own time to satisfy his own curiosity, but very work related). Friend has offered to take me around the property (something I'm not comfortable with). Still, the idea of touching base with his superior in the company before making the trip seems like a good idea to me. Thanks. Colin. > Greg. > On 4 June 2010 16:40, Colin McGregor wrote: >> >> A friend of mine works for a MAJOR Canadian corporation whose land >> holdings are such that they have private (but named) roads / streets. >> We are talking about about land where unless you have an employee ID >> card you are ... VERY unwelcome. >> >> A corporate property near where my friend works has some streets in >> Open Street Map, but not all, and there are I gather some serious >> errors. So, friend is willing to take a GPS around the property and at >> least collect track data, so the road network on the property can be >> fixed. Friend has been on this property before, been stopped by >> security, and on presentation of employee ID, not had any problems >> (any of us who are not employees of said company would not have >> anything like as easy a time). >> >> As a matter of completion I would love to see that bit of private >> property (properly) mapped, on the other hand I don't want my friend >> to get in trouble, or Open Street Map to get in trouble. So, any >> thoughts on the legalities and/or other issues that my friend should >> be aware of, before he carries a GPS with him onto company property? >> >> >> >> Colin McGregor >> >> ___ >> Talk-ca mailing list >> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > -- > Gregory > o...@livingwithdragons.com > http://www.livingwithdragons.com > ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
I don't think there should be any problems. Unless it is a big super secret what the grounds are like, e.g. Area 51. Do they also have the air space restricted to stop aerial photography? It's only roads, that will presumably be marked with access=private, not like the company documents. Ultimately it is how comfortably your friend feels. Is he allowed to wander around(e.g. in his lunch break). Is he happy explaining that the GPS is just recording his location of the road, and explaining the OSM project. It might be handy to casually chat to a friend in his department about OSM, so if he does get in trouble he can say call X who knows me and can say I work here and what I'm doing. Greg. On 4 June 2010 16:40, Colin McGregor wrote: > A friend of mine works for a MAJOR Canadian corporation whose land > holdings are such that they have private (but named) roads / streets. > We are talking about about land where unless you have an employee ID > card you are ... VERY unwelcome. > > A corporate property near where my friend works has some streets in > Open Street Map, but not all, and there are I gather some serious > errors. So, friend is willing to take a GPS around the property and at > least collect track data, so the road network on the property can be > fixed. Friend has been on this property before, been stopped by > security, and on presentation of employee ID, not had any problems > (any of us who are not employees of said company would not have > anything like as easy a time). > > As a matter of completion I would love to see that bit of private > property (properly) mapped, on the other hand I don't want my friend > to get in trouble, or Open Street Map to get in trouble. So, any > thoughts on the legalities and/or other issues that my friend should > be aware of, before he carries a GPS with him onto company property? > > > > Colin McGregor > > ___ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Mapping Private Roads?
A friend of mine works for a MAJOR Canadian corporation whose land holdings are such that they have private (but named) roads / streets. We are talking about about land where unless you have an employee ID card you are ... VERY unwelcome. A corporate property near where my friend works has some streets in Open Street Map, but not all, and there are I gather some serious errors. So, friend is willing to take a GPS around the property and at least collect track data, so the road network on the property can be fixed. Friend has been on this property before, been stopped by security, and on presentation of employee ID, not had any problems (any of us who are not employees of said company would not have anything like as easy a time). As a matter of completion I would love to see that bit of private property (properly) mapped, on the other hand I don't want my friend to get in trouble, or Open Street Map to get in trouble. So, any thoughts on the legalities and/or other issues that my friend should be aware of, before he carries a GPS with him onto company property? Colin McGregor ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Gas Pipeline with 'type'
note=* isn't a standard tag! It's based to avoid using that, as the key used for a wide range of things and for writing human-readable comments. On 4 June 2010 13:55, Sam Vekemans wrote: > Hi, > Just found another one, Im just fixing yup the wiki chart, and see that > 118001* Way PipelineNatural gas, aboveground > man_made=pipeline; type=gas > > Where it should be pipeline:type=gas > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec:_Energy_%28EN%29 > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dpipeline > The wiki does indicate that 'type=*' should be used, however, it's > standard practice to not use 'type', but instead use "pipefline:type=* > What is currently used? I didn't find it in the samples. And > perhaps going with the standard tag of note=gas pipeline could be > used instead? > > Cheers, > Sam > > Twitter: @Acrosscanada > Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ > http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans > Skype: samvekemans > IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) > @Acrosscanadatrails > > ___ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Geobase vs. Yahoo...
Hi, On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Tyler Gunn wrote: > > I was looking around winnipeg's downtown > (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.89162&lon=-97.14226&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF) > and noticed that the street grids don't align all too well to what is in > Geobase. It looks like the original outline of the street grid was done as > a tracing from Yahoo. Looking at the yahoo imagery I've noticed it is > quite difficult to see where some of the roads actually are since the > perspective of the imagery is such that the roads are covered. As a result > I'm noticing some areas where buildings are overlapping the road, or where > the roads aren't straight despite me knowing they're straight. > > So I'm curious if I should consider the GeoBase data more correct and > attempt to clean up accordingly? There's not a lot of good GPS trace data > in the area so perhaps I just need to drive out myself to get some > readings. I think you answered that yourself :) Once a few road have gps tracks, its easy to see which is off. And Once for features are added, like sidewalks and post boxes by others, over time the map quality will get better. Yahoo imagery is also old, so it's hard to say which is better. Cheers, Sam > > Thanks, > Tyler > > > ___ > 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] Geobase vs. Yahoo...
I was looking around winnipeg's downtown (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.89162&lon=-97.14226&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF) and noticed that the street grids don't align all too well to what is in Geobase. It looks like the original outline of the street grid was done as a tracing from Yahoo. Looking at the yahoo imagery I've noticed it is quite difficult to see where some of the roads actually are since the perspective of the imagery is such that the roads are covered. As a result I'm noticing some areas where buildings are overlapping the road, or where the roads aren't straight despite me knowing they're straight. So I'm curious if I should consider the GeoBase data more correct and attempt to clean up accordingly? There's not a lot of good GPS trace data in the area so perhaps I just need to drive out myself to get some readings. Thanks, Tyler ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Gas Pipeline with 'type'
Hi, Just found another one, Im just fixing yup the wiki chart, and see that 118001* Way PipelineNatural gas, aboveground man_made=pipeline; type=gas Where it should be pipeline:type=gas http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec:_Energy_%28EN%29 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dpipeline The wiki does indicate that 'type=*' should be used, however, it's standard practice to not use 'type', but instead use "pipefline:type=* What is currently used? I didn't find it in the samples. And perhaps going with the standard tag of note=gas pipeline could be used instead? Cheers, Sam Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) @Acrosscanadatrails ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] franch / english names
Hi Daniel, Ok here's one. For the named features in Quebec, is french used as the primary language? I think there is a separate dataset in some cases for the Franch language version. I know that for the National Protected areas file, Yan Morin used the different rules.txt to get french 1st. This only effects a few features, mainly road names & place names. Thanks, Sam Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) @Acrosscanadatrails ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] OSM CanVec.
Hi On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:39 AM, john whelan wrote: > I thought the whole idea of importing was to just automate loading data. > Then it can be cleaned up on the map. > > If you are suggesting manual intervention by the importer by checking > against satellite and other images aren't you defeating the purpose? > > Cheerio John Nope, the whole idea is that small tiny (NTS tile or smaller) .osm files are being made available so then local area mappers can copy in the data manually. (And using aerial imagery & toporama & other sources as backgrounds. which help improve the map) And Yes, after you open up the file in JOSM, you can easily download the OSM area of it & if you dont see anything in that area, you can upload it all. This will be true for alot of the country. (where there is no existing data). However, alot of time & effort was spent on place the OSM data in the database, and we want to ensure its quality. So there is no automation, the automation was in the creation of these combined small .osm files. In many cases, the canvec data is old (and we know this) so it wont make sence to copy in buildings (for example) if you live in the area, you can check and see that this is true. Unlike the TIGER method in the US (where it was all dropped in remotely) the canvec .osm files will remain on the NRCan servers until a local area mapper wants to copy in the data in. Making changes after the fact are much harder. I (personally) plan on doing alot of manual copying in, but only for those tiles which are close to the 'Trans Canada Trail' and paved proposed bike & dirt hiking routes. So for areas outside of this, local are mappers (with much more knowledge of the area) will be able to enhance the map with this canvec data & local knowledge. Cheers, Sam P.S. there are a lot of mappers all over the country who wont know what is going on, perhaps we should make a FAQ wiki page explaining the process better? (i could, but im afraid that others wont understand it :-) > >> >> Looks good, much better than my previous half-assed import attempts. >> >> There is a lot of out of date data in CanVec, especially in the >> buildings layer - e.g. old industrial buildings that were demolished >> ten years ago and replaced with new buildings. Please compare to >> Yahoo/survey before importing! >> >> ___ >> 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] OSM CanVec.
I thought the whole idea of importing was to just automate loading data. Then it can be cleaned up on the map. If you are suggesting manual intervention by the importer by checking against satellite and other images aren't you defeating the purpose? Cheerio John > Looks good, much better than my previous half-assed import attempts. > > There is a lot of out of date data in CanVec, especially in the > buildings layer - e.g. old industrial buildings that were demolished > ten years ago and replaced with new buildings. Please compare to > Yahoo/survey before importing! > > ___ > 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
