Re: [Talk-GB] streetmap.co.uk

[Graham Jones]

It is nice to see, but does show up my mapping of Hartlepool - as you zoom
in you go from OS rendering that includes  lots of crude outlines of
buildings, garden boundaries etc., to OSM.which doesn't.I must try
to interest some school children to do some tracing - I am far to lazy!
Still, at least the OSM version does not show the museum in the wrong place
(moved years ago!)but they do not render it at all in their OSM
rendering.

Graham.
-- 
Graham Jones
Hartlepool, UK.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Ed Loach]

Rob wrote:

> I don't see this. Right and Left tell you where the lane is, but
it does not 
> tell a user (or routing software) which direction you can ride in.
This 
> requires knowledge of which side of the road each country drives
on 
> (or forward/backward tags).

Ah, yes. I see your point. 

I was trying to say that you need left/right to say where the cycle
lanes are relative to the way to render them in the correct place,
but I can see that that doesn't tell you which way you can cycle
along them. Similarly just drawing a way on its own doesn’t tell you
which side you drive on, though there are oneway tags to cover this
(or routers can assume 2 way and not care which side).

The alternative of cycleway:forward tells routers that you can cycle
in the direction of the way (or the opposite way for
cycleway:backward), but doesn't tell renderers whether this should
be rendered to the left or the right of the way.

I guess this all relates to the issue with tagging lanes; if a road
is tagged lanes=3 how do you say how many are forward and how many
are backward? I think various proposals keep being made, but I'm not
sure anything has been settled yet?

I wish I hadn't started thinking about this now, as I think of
scenarios that I've never encountered in reality:
* twoway cycle lanes to one side of a twoway road
* cycle lanes that are oneway, but opposite direction to the
adjacent traffic lane (would this be cycleway:side=-1)

Certainly the tagging scheme for cycle lanes only really handles the
basic rendering case, I think, and requires knowledge of which side
of the way people drive for the simple routing case. And doesn't
even make clear whether it is the sort demarked with a solid or
dashed line (though perhaps there is something about this in the
wiki somewhere).

Ed


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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Martin - CycleStreets]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Andy Allan wrote:


On 18 June 2012 14:10, Graham Stewart (GrahamS) wrote:
>
> Will the errors/discrepancies we identify be fed back to the DfT?

Unless Martin knows more than I do, then in all honesty I doubt it. I'm 
hoping instead that whenever the DfT next want cycling data - say 2-3 
years down the line, they won't commission a separate dataset and will 
instead use OSM directly.


+1.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Martin - CycleStreets]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012, Tom Chance wrote:


This looks like a great project.

Can you clarify the situation in London? I don't really know what areas 
the "SuperLondonBorough" sets cover. I added some hints to the wiki as to 
where each of them open, then went from the one that starts in Sydenham 
to pan up to my neck of the woods and found there were a few odds and 
ends of orange lines, but it has taken quite a bit of panning around to 
locate them. It would be really helpful if the snapshot server could 
render a map showing where the remaining unmerged data is located.


Thanks for adding the area name hints to the wiki - been trying to get 
round to this myself.


Andy I see has added that map feature request to the wiki - have been 
thinking the same myself. Clearly we want to make sure that the data 
locations are as obvious as possible.



Martin, **  CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists
Developer, CycleStreets **  http://www.cyclestreets.net/


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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Andy Allan]

On 18 June 2012 10:58, Ed Loach  wrote:
> Also, I'm not up on cycleway lane tagging, and on a section where
> there are lanes both sides, is cycleway:left=lane and
> cycleway:right=lane correct, as per merge tool suggestions? Also,
> the merge tool is showing a suggest of Lane with a capital letter,
> which I think should be lower case.

Eurgh, I've just checked and found a few other cases where the
production data is still coming through with incorrect case on the
tags - I'd checked the first few batches, but it seems wildly
inconsistent. I've no idea how they are managing to do that!

I'll fix things up on the snapshot server, rather than asking for it
all to be regenerated.

Cheers,
Andy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Andy Allan]

On 18 June 2012 14:37, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> 'Left'/'Right' is then based on the direction of the
> way, therefore you will need to make sure that OSM's and DfT's ways are
> drawn in the SAME DIRECTION before merging!

They should be. In some cases you'll find the DfT data tagged with
"oneside" e.g. "cycleway:oneside = lane", where the direction matching
has (for whatever reason) not worked, and it's left to the mapper to
figure out which is which.

Cheers,
Andy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Tom Chance]

On 18 June 2012 14:35, Andy Allan  wrote:

> On 17 June 2012 18:30, Tom Chance  wrote:
> > It would be really helpful if the snapshot server could render a map
> showing
> > where the remaining unmerged data is located.
>
> That's a good idea, and it's something I've now added to the issues list.
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/snapshot-server/issues/6


Great.



> > I am also having trouble merging data where some streets also have ways
> for
> > admin boundaries, and Potlatch selects the boundary rather than the
> street.
> > Any tips much appreciated.
>
> " / - cycle through overlapping ways (at selected node, or where the
> way was clicked) ( # - on german keyboards, * - on Scandinavian
> keyboards) "
>
> taken from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch_2/Shortcuts


Thanks, my bad.

Tom


-- 
http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Andy Allan]

On 18 June 2012 14:10, Graham Stewart (GrahamS)  wrote:
>
> smurph wrote
>> I've just been looking through the CUBA data and I think we need to show
>> that a route is part of a relation (specifically NCNs - which are mostly
>> done by relation in the Bristol area) to avoid someone retagging all of
>> the ways as NCN when they are already part of an NCN relation.
>
> Similar situation in Northumberland: the NCNs round here are all in
> relations.
>
> In fact the "Cycle" tab on Potlatch2 treats all cycle routes as relations,
> so it is likely to be very common across the country. Perhaps the tool could
> be modified to take account of the "network" and "ref" tags on any
> "type=route"+"route=bicycle" relation applied to the way? Or perhaps just
> warn against merging *_ref tags when a way also has type=route relations on
> it?

Yes, handling the route relations isn't ideal. It's something I've yet
to solve to my satisfaction, given that we have a dataset with route
information on tags, and widespread use of route relations in OSM
itself.

I think the best thing is for people to use common sense - you can
mark a DfT line as "complete" without having to have the tags
matching, so in the situation described, there's no need to add tags
to the way.

I've tried hard to make both the p2 work and the snapshot server
completely generic and re-usable, so I'd like to avoid any hard-coding
of tags into either component. At the moment there's no side-by-side
reconciliation for relations within p2, so that would be the first
thing to work on. After that, some sort of uber-magic reconciliation
of a way+tags vs a way+relations would be required, and that's going
to need some serious work!

> Will the errors/discrepancies we identify be fed back to the DfT?

Unless Martin knows more than I do, then in all honesty I doubt it.
I'm hoping instead that whenever the DfT next want cycling data - say
2-3 years down the line, they won't commission a separate dataset and
will instead use OSM directly.

Cheers,
Andy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Rob Nickerson]

>Also, I'm not up on cycleway lane tagging, and on a section where
>there are lanes both sides, is cycleway:left=lane and
>cycleway:right=lane correct, as per merge tool suggestions? Also,
>the merge tool is showing a suggest of Lane with a capital letter,
>which I think should be lower case.
>
>Ed


Hi Ed,

>From what I understand the cycleway:left=lane (& right) is the correct way
to tag these. The choice of 'left'/'right' depends on which way the road is
drawn in OSM. As you probably already know all roads (ways) have a
direction which can be found by selecting the way and looking for the arrow
next to the rubbish bin icon. 'Left'/'Right' is then based on the direction
of the way, therefore you will need to make sure that OSM's and DfT's ways
are drawn in the SAME DIRECTION before merging!

As noted in a previous post, most other tags use 'forward'/'backward'
rather than left/right. Personally I think this would be a better tag as it
provides the data that routing software requires (without the need to know
which side of the road each country drives on). On the flip side, it would
make rendering a little harder.

Good Luck,
Rob

p.s. Do we know if DfT use the "opposite_lane" tag value? I never really
did understand the benefit this tag brings over left/right.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Andy Allan]

On 17 June 2012 18:30, Tom Chance  wrote:

> It
> would be really helpful if the snapshot server could render a map showing
> where the remaining unmerged data is located.

That's a good idea, and it's something I've now added to the issues list.

https://github.com/gravitystorm/snapshot-server/issues/6

> I am also having trouble merging data where some streets also have ways for
> admin boundaries, and Potlatch selects the boundary rather than the street.
> Any tips much appreciated.

" / - cycle through overlapping ways (at selected node, or where the
way was clicked) ( # - on german keyboards, * - on Scandinavian
keyboards) "

taken from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch_2/Shortcuts

Cheers,
Andy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Graham Stewart (GrahamS)]

smurph wrote
> I've just been looking through the CUBA data and I think we need to show
> that a route is part of a relation (specifically NCNs - which are mostly
> done by relation in the Bristol area) to avoid someone retagging all of
> the ways as NCN when they are already part of an NCN relation.

Similar situation in Northumberland: the NCNs round here are all in
relations. 

In fact the "Cycle" tab on Potlatch2 treats all cycle routes as relations,
so it is likely to be very common across the country. Perhaps the tool could
be modified to take account of the "network" and "ref" tags on any
"type=route"+"route=bicycle" relation applied to the way? Or perhaps just
warn against merging *_ref tags when a way also has type=route relations on
it?

On my local routes the DfT data is completely wrong anyway. They have parts
of the paved NCN72 (Hadrian's Cycleway) tagged as unpaved NCN10 (Reiver's
Cycle Route) , which is actually about 8km north.

Will the errors/discrepancies we identify be fed back to the DfT?

--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/England-Cycling-Data-project-DfT-cycling-data-now-available-for-merging-tp5713108p5713210.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] National Memorial Arboretum this Saturday

[Andy Robinson]

Phil,

 

The more the merrier!

 

Cheers

Andy

 

From: phil.pe...@gmail.com [mailto:phil.pe...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Philip
John
Sent: 18 June 2012 13:37
To: Andy Robinson
Cc: talk-gb-westmidla...@openstreetmap.org; Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] National Memorial Arboretum this
Saturday

 

As I live in Lichfield I was hoping to attend but now can't.

 

However, in the interests of boosting interest in and membership of
OSM/Mappa Mercia would it be useful for me to post something on my
hyperlocal site, Lichfield Live   inviting
people to join in?

 

Phil



On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Andy Robinson  wrote:

We have a micro mapping party proposed for this Saturday to the National
Memorial Arboretum [1] at Alrewas, Staffs [2]. I'm now available so will be
able to make it and I'll do a little planning this week to smooth the day.
It would be handy to get an idea of numbers who are planning to come along
so if you can respond to the list that would be great.

The NMA is a sobering place to visit so don't be surprised if you spend more
time reading the memorial details than mapping if you haven’t been before.
At 150 acres the site is far bigger than you can individually get around in
one day and see everything.

The NMA has its own map which they sell for £3 together with a detailed
guidebook for £6.50. They also have a simple 3D map on their website [3].
Our plan is to improve our own detail and get as many of the memorials on
OpenStreetMap as possible (there are hundreds!)

Entrance to the NMA is Free (they encourage donation) and car parking is £3
Pay and Display. Alternatively you can cycle to it by taking Route 54 from
Lichfield/Burton [4] and looking out for the signs to the Arboretum through
Alrewas or Fradley. Suggest you plan the route first as the Sustrans cycle
signs are not that easy to spot. The quiet route signed is through Fradley.
Note there is no access from Alrewas directly to Croxall Road, you have to
use the main Burton Road (A513) instead.

There is a visitor café/restaurant on site which is where I suggest we meet
at 10am (they open at 9) and also would be the logical place for lunch
unless you bring your own sandwiches.
Note that the site is quite exposed and can be bracing when windy so be
prepared for the weather on the day.

Cheers
Andy

[1] http://www.thenma.org.uk/
[2]  http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72855

&lon=-1.7266&zoom=16&layers=M
[3] http://www.thenma.org.uk/the-nma/map/map-of-the-arboretum/
[4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72986

&lon=-1.73671&zoom=15&layers=C






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

 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] How to work with Government Open Data (e.g. Boundaries, Rights of Way)

[Gregory]

How do footpaths work legally with textual descriptions?
If a field has a stile/gate at opposite corners. The footpath may have
originally cut across, legally the landowner has to allow access between
the two gates, but can he make people walk round the edge of his field.
Also in reverse, if the footpath was originally walking round the edge
until people walked diagonally across and the landowner allowed that by
leaving a gap in crops and blocking the edge.
Has the footpath/access changed?

My point being that if that's fine, then we should map on-the-ground truth
between the gates and field boundaries. You can usually tell on the ground
which way the majority of people are walking across a footpath.

Of course there may be cases where changes are happening and we don't want
the map to support a case that nobody goes that way any more. If a farmer
starts growing crops over what has originally been a diagonal cut-across
footpath, and there are still a few people that walk that way (or you do)
then keep it mapped. If the majority of people are walking a longer way
around the edge (put off by the crops) then that could be tagged as a
non-designated footpath/path with only highway tag and maybe a note.


I have an example footpath I've mapped.
There is a stile in the middle of a non-farmed field, not part of a
fence/barrier http://www.openstreetmap.org/?node=264320738
I could have cut the corner a bit (not too much as it's slopped and has
large puddles), but I made sure I walked right to the stile when mapping. I
don't think it's ever going to be argued the footpath must meet that point,
but it's a useful navigation aid on the map. It would be confusing for a
map to have a stile that's separate stile to the path!

On 16 June 2012 16:28,  wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> I agree that we don't want to take Hants data at face value and load this
> into OSM where a path is already mapped. I have added my answers below:
>
> Q1. Hampshire marked footpath and OSM footpath run very close to each
> other (deviating by only a few meters max). No obvious marking on Bing
> Aerial
> Q2. As with Q1, but Bing Aerial shows clear path (neither OSM or Hampshire
> line up with this path perfectly).
>
> A1. Use OSM path and tag with designation
> A2. As A1 (optionally align path to Bing, GPS survey would help here).
>
> - - -
> Q3. OSM path crosses diagonally over a field (roughly following the path
> visible on Bing). Hampshire's data indicates a kink in the route so that in
> the middle of the field the gap reaches about 20-30 meters.
> Q4. OSM path crosses over 2 fields (following Bing path and cutting
> through a gap in hedgerow). Path is a straight line at an angle 'x' from
> the road. Hampshire's data shows the path runs straight, but at angle 'y'.
> Max deviation 50m. What about a smaller deviation of only 15m?
> Q5. As 4 above but the Hampshire path appears to cross the hedgerow where
> there is no visible gap on Bings imagery.
>
> A3-5. Research using other sources (ground survey, NLS scanned OS maps,
> etc). If no path found where Hants suggests there should be one, tag the
> OSM path instead (add a note). If there is a path where Hants puts it, then
> this should be mapped -> This could result in 2 paths being mapped, but
> would be correct if there are 2 paths on the ground.
>
> - - -
> Q6. Hampshire have a path marked that is not in OSM. Bing shows there is
> something there.
> Q7. As 6 but no marking on Bing. No obvious obstructions
> Q8. As 7 but there is an potential obstruction (e.g. woodland with no
> clear path - although this would be hard to see on Bing)
> Q9. As 8 but there is an obvious obstruction (e.g. building).
>
> A6-9. Trace the path from bing for Q6 (add a fixme tag). Q7-9 really could
> do with a ground survey.
>
> - - -
> To test these rules I had a go at mapping BOAT "Martin. 15". Neither OSM
> or Hants data lined up well with the Bing aerial (even with a simple
> offset). In this example there is a clear modern track. Two sections of the
> modern track appear to deviate from the historic route (I looked on the NLS
> maps to get a better idea of the historic route and cross referenced this
> with Bing aerial). The right hand section is still clearly visible on Bing,
> suggesting it is still used. The left hand section follows what looks to be
> a tree lined route. This suggests that I have identified the correct
> 'historic' route, but the trees make it hard to tell if the route is still
> passable.
>
> I mapped the whole of the 'modern' track as highway=track. The 2 other
> sections, I mapped as highway=path and added a fixme comment to suggest
> resurvey. I then added the designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic tag to the
> route that follows the 'historic' path. I was reasonable happy doing this
> because if the left hand section route is impassable there is a clear
> alternative. Let me know your thoughts on this.
>
> Visualisation of edit history:
> http://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=11915562

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Richard Mann]

I'd be tempted to convert the cycleway=lane into cycleway:left=lane and
cycleway:right=lane anyway, since (if I understand it right), it's
relatively easy to tag-transform it back again, for data users who can only
use symmetrical stuff. The capital letter is wrong though.

Richard

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Ed Loach  wrote:

> Also, I'm not up on cycleway lane tagging, and on a section where
> there are lanes both sides, is cycleway:left=lane and
> cycleway:right=lane correct, as per merge tool suggestions? Also,
> the merge tool is showing a suggest of Lane with a capital letter,
> which I think should be lower case.
>
> Ed
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Ed Loach]

One last comment for now.

When looking at a project page, such as:
http://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/cnxc-snapshot/projects/78/
tagged_ways
It would be good to have a link to edit a relevant area, or failing
that at least a latitude/longitude so you can find the way. I've
followed the two cycle routes in the district and dealt with those,
but it looks like there are other ways in the data and I don't know
how to find where they are, rather than panning around and hoping I
stumble across them.

Or maybe I can track down the original DfT data and look at that in
some other viewer.

Ed


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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] National Memorial Arboretum this Saturday

[Andy Mabbett]

On 18 June 2012 10:31, Andy Robinson  wrote:

> We have a micro mapping party proposed for this Saturday to the National
> Memorial Arboretum [1] at Alrewas, Staffs [2].

> Our plan is to improve our own detail and get as many of the memorials on
> OpenStreetMap as possible (there are hundreds!)

Sadly, I don't think I can make it due to a prior commitment, but I'd
been planning to go there and do some mapping of memorials, as
follow-up to an event I was at last weekend:

http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/World_War_I/World_War_I_Editathon

which was part of a larger activity, improving coverage of WWI on
Wikipedia in the run-up to the 100th anniversary commemorations.

May I urge those of you who can attend to please consider taking and
uploading pictures to Wikimedia Commons, to supplement those already
available there:

 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:National_Memorial_Arboretum

and including Wikipedia links in OSM, per:

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikipedia

and its talk page discussion on related articles:

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:wikipedia

The main English Wikipedia article on the NMA is:

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

I'm sure you'll find it  fascinating place to visit. You my also like
to note the adjacent River Tame/ Trent confluence.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] streetmap.co.uk

[Dave F.]

On 18/06/2012 11:05, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
www.streetmap.co.uk - one of the two first UK mapping sites (along 
with Multimap) - has started using OSM. Their 1:5k layer is now 
OSM-based outside London, where they still use A-Z. Custom cartography 
in quite an A-Z-like style!


Good news.

Do you have any background info on why the decided to use OSM?

With what regularity will they be updating?

Cheers
Dave F.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] streetmap.co.uk

[Barry Cornelius]

They credit "Open Street Map" rather than "OpenStreetMap".

--
Barry Cornelius
http://www.northeastraces.com/
http://www.thehs2.com/
http://www.rowmaps.com/
http://www.oxonpaths.com/
http://www.barrycornelius.com/


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

[Talk-GB] Meet up Edinburgh at Guildford arms tomorrow Tues 19th June

[Bob Kerr]

Hi we will be having a pub social in Edinburgh

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Edinburgh#Social_Events


We have been offered a photo lab with a wikipedia group, date still to be 
arranged.

Cheers

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

Re: [Talk-GB] streetmap.co.uk

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 06/18/2012 12:05 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

www.streetmap.co.uk - one of the two first UK mapping sites (along with
Multimap) - has started using OSM. Their 1:5k layer is now OSM-based
outside London, where they still use A-Z. Custom cartography in quite an
A-Z-like style!


Maybe they should work on their "This data may not be reproduced in any 
form without permission." then ;)


Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

[Talk-GB] streetmap.co.uk

[Richard Fairhurst]

www.streetmap.co.uk - one of the two first UK mapping sites (along with 
Multimap) - has started using OSM. Their 1:5k layer is now OSM-based 
outside London, where they still use A-Z. Custom cartography in quite an 
A-Z-like style!


cheers
Richard


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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Ed Loach]

Also, I'm not up on cycleway lane tagging, and on a section where
there are lanes both sides, is cycleway:left=lane and
cycleway:right=lane correct, as per merge tool suggestions? Also,
the merge tool is showing a suggest of Lane with a capital letter,
which I think should be lower case.

Ed


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

[Talk-GB] National Memorial Arboretum this Saturday

[Andy Robinson]

We have a micro mapping party proposed for this Saturday to the National
Memorial Arboretum [1] at Alrewas, Staffs [2]. I'm now available so will be
able to make it and I'll do a little planning this week to smooth the day.
It would be handy to get an idea of numbers who are planning to come along
so if you can respond to the list that would be great.

The NMA is a sobering place to visit so don't be surprised if you spend more
time reading the memorial details than mapping if you haven’t been before.
At 150 acres the site is far bigger than you can individually get around in
one day and see everything.

The NMA has its own map which they sell for £3 together with a detailed
guidebook for £6.50. They also have a simple 3D map on their website [3].
Our plan is to improve our own detail and get as many of the memorials on
OpenStreetMap as possible (there are hundreds!)

Entrance to the NMA is Free (they encourage donation) and car parking is £3
Pay and Display. Alternatively you can cycle to it by taking Route 54 from
Lichfield/Burton [4] and looking out for the signs to the Arboretum through
Alrewas or Fradley. Suggest you plan the route first as the Sustrans cycle
signs are not that easy to spot. The quiet route signed is through Fradley.
Note there is no access from Alrewas directly to Croxall Road, you have to
use the main Burton Road (A513) instead.

There is a visitor café/restaurant on site which is where I suggest we meet
at 10am (they open at 9) and also would be the logical place for lunch
unless you bring your own sandwiches.
Note that the site is quite exposed and can be bracing when windy so be
prepared for the weather on the day.

Cheers
Andy

[1] http://www.thenma.org.uk/ 
[2]  http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72855&lon=-1.7266&zoom=16&layers=M
[3] http://www.thenma.org.uk/the-nma/map/map-of-the-arboretum/
[4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72986&lon=-1.73671&zoom=15&layers=C






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

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Ed Loach]

Are there any notes I'm missing about how to access and deal with
nodes in the DfT data? e.g.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edloach/7392860104/in/photostream

Ed

> -Original Message-
> From: Martin - CycleStreets [mailto:list-osm-talk-
> g...@cyclestreets.net]
> Sent: 17 June 2012 12:44
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data
> now available for merging
> 
> 
> 
> As previously announced [1], we've been working with Andy Allan
> and the
> DfT's contractors to open up the cycling data that the DfT have
> collected
> (via manual surveys on bikes) over recent years.
> 
> This data for each area is now available, converted, and ready for
> easy
> merging in with a new Potlatch2 tool Andy has written. The DfT is
> very keen
> to see the data more widely used, by OSM.
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project
> 
> It has these attributes, and the CycleStreets router [2] now
supports
> them:
> 
> - Surface quality (surface=)
> - Local Cycle Network signage (lcn=)
> - Lots of missing paths not yet in OSM
> - Cycle lane/path widths (width/est_width=)
> - Barriers of various kinds (barrier=)
> - Traffic calming (traffic_calming=)
> - Lighting (lit=)
> 
> The LCN tags, surface tags, and missing paths, will particularly
help
> the
> routing quality, as Shaun/Gregory who see user feedback will
> attest!
> 
> The wiki URL above has a link to each area, and there's a
screencast
> on
> Andy's merging tool:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_sMxpWptCQ
> 
> I've so far merged in almost half the Cambridge data in under half
a
> day.
> We'd love to see a local 'cheerleader' for each area. Could you
sign
> up on
> the Wiki for that?
> 
> 
> Further work we're doing in support of this project is:
> 
> - Writing articles for CTC, LCC and other cycling groups about
getting
> involved in OpenStreetMap surveying more generally, and
> hopefully then
> helping with this merging project.
> 
> - Creating a resource for local Councils to inform them about OSM
> data, the
> merging tool, and how it will improve cycle journey planning.
> 
> - Getting our feedback system map-enabled (it's purely tabular at
> the
> moment!) and opened up so that the effect of merging in this data
> is
> clearer. We can't directly use MapDust as bugs need triaging first
to
> avoid
> MapDust getting engine-related spam or having personal data in.
> 
> - Getting the P2 customisations into our local copy on the
> CycleStreets
> website and making the existence of the data clearer in various
> ways.
> 
> - Hoping to get some visualisations done of merged coverage.
> 
> - Screencasts and other documentation.
> 
> - Any usability improvements in response to feedback on the tool.
> 
> 
> 
> [1] Talk-gb discussions, which provided useful feedback, now
> incorporated:
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011-
> October/012256.html
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-
> January/012764.html
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-
> March/012900.html
> 
> 
> [2] http://www.cyclestreets.net/blog/2012/05/20/more-osm-tags-
> supported/
> 
> 
> Martin, **  CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By
Cyclists
> Developer, CycleStreets **  http://www.cyclestreets.net/
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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