Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey National Grid maps of Edinburgh

[SK53]

I met Richard Rodger who is leading the MESH project at Edinburgh
University. Addresses in central Edinburgh have changed so little in 200
years that they are able to use OSM to map where attorneys were located in
the middle of the 19th Century. The historical addresses were acquired from
Business Directories. And MESH is the reason why these particular maps have
been done. There is a link to the project there.

I dont think there is that much detailed information available yet, but it
looks to be shaping up to be both a fascinating project and a classic
example of how OSM data can be used for purposes very different from what
one might expect.

Jerry


On 11 August 2014 22:52, Donald Noble  wrote:

> Thanks Rob,
>
> The alignment matches well with both bing and what is already on OSM
> (although this may largely be derived).
>
> Also pleasing to note that the addresses I have surveyed match those
> on the OS map - don't suppose they change all that often.
>
> Cheers, Donald
>
> On 10 August 2014 00:04, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> > Hi all, particularly those folk mapping up in Scotland,
> >
> > The National Library of Scotland has added the earliest editions of
> Ordnance
> > Survey National Grid maps covering the Edinburgh environs to their online
> > map offerings.
> >
> > http://maps.nls.uk/additions.html#28
> >
> > What's so special about these maps is that they show details right down
> to
> > individual buildings plus their addresses! I think this is a first for
> the
> > UK (Warwickshire CC have a map layer of these National Grid maps but
> theirs
> > cover a period which is still in copyright so cannot be used for OSM).
> >
> > If out mapping and you want to double check an address, this could be a
> > great asset to have at your disposal.
> >
> > To add this to JOSM you need to create a new imagery layer with the
> > following URL:
> >
> > http://geo.nls.uk/mapdata3/os/edinburgh_1250_out/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rob
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Donald Noble
> http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
>
> ___
> 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] Ordnance Survey National Grid maps of Edinburgh

[Donald Noble]

Thanks Rob,

The alignment matches well with both bing and what is already on OSM
(although this may largely be derived).

Also pleasing to note that the addresses I have surveyed match those
on the OS map - don't suppose they change all that often.

Cheers, Donald

On 10 August 2014 00:04, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> Hi all, particularly those folk mapping up in Scotland,
>
> The National Library of Scotland has added the earliest editions of Ordnance
> Survey National Grid maps covering the Edinburgh environs to their online
> map offerings.
>
> http://maps.nls.uk/additions.html#28
>
> What's so special about these maps is that they show details right down to
> individual buildings plus their addresses! I think this is a first for the
> UK (Warwickshire CC have a map layer of these National Grid maps but theirs
> cover a period which is still in copyright so cannot be used for OSM).
>
> If out mapping and you want to double check an address, this could be a
> great asset to have at your disposal.
>
> To add this to JOSM you need to create a new imagery layer with the
> following URL:
>
> http://geo.nls.uk/mapdata3/os/edinburgh_1250_out/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
>
> Regards,
> Rob
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>



-- 
Donald Noble
http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble

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

[Talk-GB] newbie alert - railways in North Kent

[Colin Smale]

 

Particularly if you have an interest in railway tagging (both stations
and track) in north Kent you might want to keep a watch out for new
mapper James Philips who joined us in July and has been unilaterally
reworking some tagging. Unfortunately he has left several unconnected
tracks, as well as tagging the track as a platform with name=Platform 1
and tagging the station buildings with railway=station (which may not be
wrong, depends how you look at it) while leaving all the other tags on
the original node, which gets tagged as a platform. The station "XXX"
also gets named "XXX Railway Station". 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/James%20Phillips 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 06:55 +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
> Can I apply this reasoning to English names for Belgian towns as
> well ?
> Where can I verify that the English name for Antwerpen is
> Antwerp ? What is the source of this data? Under which license was
> that made available ?
> How can someone who's local to Antwerp actually verify that the name
> that you've added is correct?
> 
I must admit I agree with you, we know because we know. Although I guess
thats expected as Belgium and the UK are neighbours with a history of
travelling between the countries. 

There are too many translated names, many European cities have English
names I was not aware of. I tripped over reading a news article today
which mentioned Wuerzberg, it took a few seconds to work out it was
referring to Würzburg. If I was writing that article it wouldn't have
occurred to me to look up an English spelling. Wuerzberg, may be closer
to to the pronunciation, not sure, I can cope with umlauts.

Modified spelling do not help however, most people are far more likely
to encounter the word Würzburg on a motorway sign or a railway departure
board than are likely to want to say it, its far easier to gloss over
the umlaut than have a strange spelling that doesn't appear on the
signposts.

Although the Belgians did confuse me once, driving through Belgium
towards Lille, the signs suddenly changed to Rijsel for no apparent
reason.

Phil (trigpoint)







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

Re: [Talk-GB] A431 toll road (going a bit OT)

[David Woolley]

On 11/08/14 10:33, Dave F. wrote:

On 05/08/2014 15:00, Curon Davies wrote:

On 5 August 2014 14:25, Dave F. mailto:dave...@madasafish.com>> wrote:
>
> One reason I haven't added it is because it's illegal (AFAIK. The
owners of the land & local councillor failed to reply to my tweets) &
definitely has no planning permission.

The development isn't illegal, there is no criminal offence (AFAIK),
on the other hand it is unlawful.


a) Semantics
b) Isn't there a statute law which says 'you can't build or open a road
without authorisation'?


It seems to me that this is being driven by one particular application 
of the map, motor vehicle routing.


The road exists.  It is possible to get permission to use it if you are 
under 3.5T.  Therefore I would say that something like this is valid: 
highway=unclassified; motor_vehicles=yes/permissive; hgv=no; fee=yes is 
necessary.


If that results in routing applications using it in a way that voids 
insurance, maybe add something like mib_approved=no.


Buildings certainly should still be mapped, even if they don't have 
planning permission (four years for construction and 10 for use are more 
permanent than most shop tenancies).


Settlements should be mapped, even if some other country disputes their 
legality.


More generally, though, it is dangerous for something like OSM to claim 
authority on the legal status of any object.  Locally, you put yourself 
at risk of being sued when you turn out to be wrong.  Internationally, 
it increases the pressure to ban it from countries involved with border 
disputes.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] A431 toll road (going a bit OT)

[david]

I would hope so, for anyone who has ever been to a village fete and 
parked in the farmers field.




Getting insurance is dead easy. These companies love being given money
for old rope, (think of extended warranties for your big screen TV).
Receiving a payout is another matter. Will _your_ policy compensate if
you hit another vehicle on an unlawful road?

Dave F.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] A431 toll road (going a bit OT)

[Dave F.]

On 05/08/2014 15:00, Curon Davies wrote:
On 5 August 2014 14:25, Dave F. > wrote:

>
> One reason I haven't added it is because it's illegal (AFAIK. The 
owners of the land & local councillor failed to reply to my tweets) & 
definitely has no planning permission.


The development isn't illegal, there is no criminal offence (AFAIK), 
on the other hand it is unlawful.


a) Semantics
b) Isn't there a statute law which says 'you can't build or open a road 
without authorisation'?




> They have produced no proof it's been constructed to DfT/HA standards.

AFAIK roads only need to be constructed to this standard if the road 
is to be adopted, there are numerous developments where the road isn't 
built to standard, yet they are still mapped on OSM.


AFAIK adoption is only the transfer of responsibility for maintenance 
i.e. from the building contractor to the local municipal authority. The 
roads, depending on there usage, have to be constructed to various 
standards. I can't imagine the M6 toll was allowed to get away with 
rolling out just 150mm thick layer of compacted hardcore.




> Insurance (all parties) is unclear & possibly suspect. Another 
reason is I don't map everybody's private drive way.


Although questionable, the road is opperated by KELSTON TOLL ROAD 
LIMITED, and therefore would require public liability insurance.


Getting insurance is dead easy. These companies love being given money 
for old rope, (think of extended warranties for your big screen TV). 
Receiving a payout is another matter. Will _your_ policy compensate if 
you hit another vehicle on an unlawful road?


Dave F.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] A431 toll road

[Colin Smale]

 

In this case it is not our access to, or use of, the road which may be
illegal (the landowner is giving us permission after all, once we hand
over the two quid) but the very existence of the road, because it was
constructed without the requisite planning permission. 

On 2014-08-11 11:10, Dave F. wrote: 

> On 05/08/2014 15:38, Andy Robinson wrote:
> 
>> Whether its legal is not our concern surely
> 
> Not really true:
> 
> So many of the tags used are based around legal regulations:
> access=*
> max_speed=*
> bicycle=no
> etc... etc...
> 
> Dave F.
> 
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus 
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com [1]
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb [2]
 

Links:
--
[1] http://www.avast.com
[2] 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] City names translation

[Derick Rethans]

On Sun, 10 Aug 2014, SomeoneElse wrote:

> On 04/08/2014 16:15, Pavlo Dudka wrote:
>
> > Hi! I would like to add ukrainian names for cities of UK, but found 
> > that SomeoneElse_Revert removed some of name:uk-tags in changeset 
> > 20757217 with a comment "reverting undiscussed Ukrainian 
> > "translations" including ones for which there's nothing on the 
> > ground". This is the list of cities I plan to modify: 
> > http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4rF
> 
> I notice that you've now decided to upload this changeset adding 
> Ukrainian "names" for places:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/24588556
> 
> Taking for example Nottingham:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/24913081
> 
> What is the source of this data?
> 
> Under what licence was it made available?
> 
> How can someone who's local to Nottingham actually verify that the 
> name that you've added is correct?
> 
> For the record it looks like a simple "soundalike translation" of 
> Nottingham from one alphabet to another, rather than a unique name at 
> all.

It looks like it perhaps, just like "Londen" (used in Dutch) is a 
"soundalike translation" from its English counterpart. And you'd 
certainly not find "Londen" on any sign in London to verify this 
*correct* Dutch name for it. But it's certainly correct that London has 
name:nl = Londen.

cheers,
Derick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] A431 toll road

[Dave F.]

On 05/08/2014 15:38, Andy Robinson wrote:

Whether its legal is not our concern surely


Not really true:

So many of the tags used are based around legal regulations:
access=*
max_speed=*
bicycle=no
etc... etc...

Dave F.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com


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