Re: [Talk-GB] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

[John Aldridge]

On 18-Aug-16 14:47, Craig Wallace wrote:

The Garmin maps is another question. They seem to label the whole area
with the island name, which is often unhelpful and confusing, even for
smaller islands. Probably better just to have a label in the middle of
the island, or on the coast.


If anyone else needs a workround for this, I noticed this issue when I 
rebuilt my Garmin maps the other day, and resolved it at least for now 
by commenting out the lines.


# place=island & name=* [0x53 resolution 19]
# place=islet & name=* [0x53 resolution 20]

from the 'polygons' style file. It was particularly irritating, because 
as well as the name scattered everywhere, it put a hatch pattern over 
the whole island (at least when viewed in BaseCamp)!


--
Cheers,
John

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Defibrillator Mapping

[Donald Noble]

The locations on the lucky2bhere website don't seem to be that accurate for
the ones I have some local knowledge of in the Spey valley, so would only
be of use as a guide for accurate survey.

Regards, Donald

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 at 16:38, Alasdair McKinnon 
wrote:

> I recently saw this article in The Courier regarding defibrillator maps
> for Perthshire.
>
>
> https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/perth-kinross/260155/map-rolled-out-for-life-saving-equipment
> /
>
> Hopefully some usable info there.
>
> Al.
>
> Sent from BlueMail 
>
> On 18 Aug 2016, at 15:09, Craig Wallace  wrote:
>
>> On 2016-08-16 09:35, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>>
>>>  Just to let you know, that I've now got another dataset in my
>>>  Defibrillator comparison tool at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/defib/
>>>  . East Midlands Ambulance Service has provided the locations of AEDs
>>>  that they know about, and these have now been imported into the tool.
>>>  As in other areas, our mapping of Defibrillators in the East Midlands
>>>  doesn't seem to be very complete yet...
>>>
>>
>> For Scotland, maybe look at Lucky 2 B Here. http://www.lucky2bhere.org/
>> They have supplied a lot of defibrillators, mostly around the west
>> highlands and islands.
>>
>> They have a Google map on their website, maybe they could provide the
>> data. http://www.lucky2bhere.org/live-aed-map/
>> I'm not sure how accurate their locations are. Note some of them may not
>> be publicly accessible, ie in sports clubs or schools, and it seems some
>> are on fishing boats.
>>
>> I have surveyed a few of the local ones, and added them to OSM.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> --
>>
>> 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
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Defibrillator Mapping

[Alasdair McKinnon]

I recently saw this article in The Courier regarding defibrillator maps for 
Perthshire. 

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/perth-kinross/260155/map-rolled-out-for-life-saving-equipment/

Hopefully some usable info there.

Al.

Sent from BlueMail



On 18 Aug 2016, 15:09, at 15:09, Craig Wallace  wrote:
>On 2016-08-16 09:35, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>> Just to let you know, that I've now got another dataset in my
>> Defibrillator comparison tool at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/defib/
>> . East Midlands Ambulance Service has provided the locations of AEDs
>> that they know about, and these have now been imported into the tool.
>> As in other areas, our mapping of Defibrillators in the East Midlands
>> doesn't seem to be very complete yet...
>
>For Scotland, maybe look at Lucky 2 B Here. http://www.lucky2bhere.org/
>They have supplied a lot of defibrillators, mostly around the west 
>highlands and islands.
>
>They have a Google map on their website, maybe they could provide the 
>data. http://www.lucky2bhere.org/live-aed-map/
>I'm not sure how accurate their locations are. Note some of them may
>not 
>be publicly accessible, ie in sports clubs or schools, and it seems
>some 
>are on fishing boats.
>
>I have surveyed a few of the local ones, and added them to OSM.
>
>Craig
>
>___
>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] Defibrillator Mapping

[Craig Wallace]

On 2016-08-16 09:35, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

Just to let you know, that I've now got another dataset in my
Defibrillator comparison tool at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/defib/
. East Midlands Ambulance Service has provided the locations of AEDs
that they know about, and these have now been imported into the tool.
As in other areas, our mapping of Defibrillators in the East Midlands
doesn't seem to be very complete yet...


For Scotland, maybe look at Lucky 2 B Here. http://www.lucky2bhere.org/
They have supplied a lot of defibrillators, mostly around the west 
highlands and islands.


They have a Google map on their website, maybe they could provide the 
data. http://www.lucky2bhere.org/live-aed-map/
I'm not sure how accurate their locations are. Note some of them may not 
be publicly accessible, ie in sports clubs or schools, and it seems some 
are on fishing boats.


I have surveyed a few of the local ones, and added them to OSM.

Craig

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

[Ian Caldwell]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain


Ian

On 18 August 2016 at 14:32, Colin Smale  wrote:

> I am not sure the GB main island is actually called Great Britain. GB is a
> "country," not an island. Is the Isle of Wight not included?
>
>
> As to creating holes for lakes, that is weird. If I am on a boat on
> Windermere, am I suddenly no longer on the big island and no longer within
> GB?
>
> It is undoubtedly an island, but whether it is an island with an
> independent name/identity, and whether that name/identity is "Great
> Britain", I don't think the arguments are convincing.
>
> I wonder if there is a place=island for Australia? Does that include
> Tasmania?
>
> --colin
>
> On 2016-08-18 14:51, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> This was prompted by a comment directed at me on
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37713755 , after I'd mentioned a
> problem raised on the help site that might be related
> https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/49058/rendering-
> of-lakes-on-garmin-devices .
>
> Given that it seems impossible to manage effectively* I wouldn't object to
> it being deleted (but don't have a particularly strong view either way).
> If it's not deleted, does someone need to add all GB lakes and rivers as
> inners?
>
> What does everyone else think?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
> * including with JOSM, before all you fanboys pipe up :) - a duplicate
> appeared as a result of some "normal editing" on the LLyn in
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41130893 .  I'm sure that Dudley
> will delete the duplicate when he gets a chance; it's the original I'm
> asking about.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

[Craig Wallace]

On 2016-08-18 13:51, Andy Townsend wrote:

This was prompted by a comment directed at me on
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37713755 , after I'd mentioned a
problem raised on the help site that might be related
https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/49058/rendering-of-lakes-on-garmin-devices
.

Given that it seems impossible to manage effectively* I wouldn't object
to it being deleted (but don't have a particularly strong view either
way).  If it's not deleted, does someone need to add all GB lakes and
rivers as inners?

What does everyone else think?


I think its a good idea to map islands as areas, where possible. It 
makes it possible to figure out what is on that island, so could be used 
for geocoding etc. Plus you can calculate the size of the island, which 
could be useful for rendering.


I don't think lakes and rivers should be inners, because they are still 
part of the island, so should be counted as part of the area. ie they 
are 'on top' of the island, not 'holes' within it.


Though yes, managing huge relations is a problem. They will inevitably 
get broken at some point, so would be a lot of work to maintain. Maybe 
it could be split into smaller sections?


The Garmin maps is another question. They seem to label the whole area 
with the island name, which is often unhelpful and confusing, even for 
smaller islands. Probably better just to have a label in the middle of 
the island, or on the coast.


Craig

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

[Colin Smale]

I am not sure the GB main island is actually called Great Britain. GB is
a "country," not an island. Is the Isle of Wight not included?

As to creating holes for lakes, that is weird. If I am on a boat on
Windermere, am I suddenly no longer on the big island and no longer
within GB? 

It is undoubtedly an island, but whether it is an island with an
independent name/identity, and whether that name/identity is "Great
Britain", I don't think the arguments are convincing. 

I wonder if there is a place=island for Australia? Does that include
Tasmania? 

--colin 

On 2016-08-18 14:51, Andy Townsend wrote:

> This was prompted by a comment directed at me on 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37713755 , after I'd mentioned a 
> problem raised on the help site that might be related 
> https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/49058/rendering-of-lakes-on-garmin-devices
>  .
> 
> Given that it seems impossible to manage effectively* I wouldn't object to it 
> being deleted (but don't have a particularly strong view either way).  If 
> it's not deleted, does someone need to add all GB lakes and rivers as inners?
> 
> What does everyone else think?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy
> 
> * including with JOSM, before all you fanboys pipe up :) - a duplicate 
> appeared as a result of some "normal editing" on the LLyn in 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41130893 .  I'm sure that Dudley will 
> delete the duplicate when he gets a chance; it's the original I'm asking 
> about.
> 
> ___
> 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] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

[Dave F]

I'm a bit confused. How was Great Britain defined before the creation of 
these MPs?


From my own experience, changes to the appearance of Garmin maps are 
often due to updated software used to manipulate OSM data. Mkgmap for 
example.


Dave F.

On 18/08/2016 13:51, Andy Townsend wrote:
This was prompted by a comment directed at me on 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37713755 , after I'd mentioned 
a problem raised on the help site that might be related 
https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/49058/rendering-of-lakes-on-garmin-devices 
.


Given that it seems impossible to manage effectively* I wouldn't 
object to it being deleted (but don't have a particularly strong view 
either way).  If it's not deleted, does someone need to add all GB 
lakes and rivers as inners?


What does everyone else think?

Cheers,

Andy


* including with JOSM, before all you fanboys pipe up :) - a duplicate 
appeared as a result of some "normal editing" on the LLyn in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41130893 .  I'm sure that 
Dudley will delete the duplicate when he gets a chance; it's the 
original I'm asking about.




___
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

[Talk-GB] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

[Andy Townsend]

This was prompted by a comment directed at me on 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37713755 , after I'd mentioned a 
problem raised on the help site that might be related 
https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/49058/rendering-of-lakes-on-garmin-devices 
.


Given that it seems impossible to manage effectively* I wouldn't object 
to it being deleted (but don't have a particularly strong view either 
way).  If it's not deleted, does someone need to add all GB lakes and 
rivers as inners?


What does everyone else think?

Cheers,

Andy


* including with JOSM, before all you fanboys pipe up :) - a duplicate 
appeared as a result of some "normal editing" on the LLyn in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41130893 .  I'm sure that Dudley 
will delete the duplicate when he gets a chance; it's the original I'm 
asking about.




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

Re: [Talk-GB] ref:hectares on admin boundary, and non-responsive mapper

[Dave F]

I see you point, but boundary is always preferable if possible. 
Geographical Suburbs appears ot be the main stumbling block.


I haven't studied Alex's edits in detail but from his diary he appears 
to be duplicating; adding both boundary & is_in to the same entities. 
Superfluous.


Dave F.

On 17/08/2016 07:55, David Woolley wrote:

On 17/08/16 00:57, Dave F wrote:

As far as I can see is_in:* is used for the same things as boundaries,
but is less efficient & prone to errors.

Are you aware of any utilities that use is_in:*?

To me, the value of is_in is that it allows for cases where there is n 
usable source for the actual boundary, but local people will still 
know on which side of the boundary they lie.


___
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] National Park extensions

[Colin Smale]

Hi, 

In May I worked with Shaun Lewis to update the Brecon Beacons NP
boundary. He is the GIS Officer for the Brecon Beacons National Park - I
know that's in Wales, and may not be 100% relevant here. He told me the
following: 

"The boundary was digitized on historical OS mapping, aerial
photography, and also Ordnance Survey Mastermap. But i went through a
process with the Ordnance Survey to make it open data, and it now falls
under the Open Government Licence: 

https://data.gov.uk/dataset/brecon-beacons-national-park-boundary "

If there are any residual issues about licensing, maybe Shaun would be
able to assist with some relevant experience. 

//colin 

On 2016-08-17 18:38, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

> On 17 August 2016 at 16:42, jc...@mail.com  wrote: 
> 
>> I know there has been some caution against using Natural England data 
>> directly in OSM, so I wasn't surprised that the boundaries weren't 
>> immediately updated when the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National 
>> Parks were expanded from 1st August. [1]
> 
> I presume the caution that this was because of Licensing issues.
> Natural England are/were using a custom version of the OGL for which
> compatibility with the ODbL used by OSM wasn't guaranteed. They should
> have switched to using the OGL 3 now, but not everything has been
> updated last time I looked.
> 
> If you follow the link from
> https://data.gov.uk/dataset/national-parks-england and register, I
> think you can get a download of the National Park boundaries in either
> Mapinfo or Shapefile format. The website claims they've been updated
> for the August changes (I haven't checked.) Despite some contradictory
> messages along the way, the only thing that could be interpreted as a
> licence that's included with the download says it's OGL3 -- which
> would mean it's ok to use in OSM, provided the appropriate attribution
> statement is added to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors
> .
> 
> Robert Whittaker
> 
> ___
> 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] National Park extensions

[Phillip Barnett]

Can the written description be used as a source?

> On 17 Aug 2016, at 19:57, Andy Townsend  wrote:
> 
>> On 17/08/2016 16:42, jc...@mail.com wrote:
>> As a result much of what has been added is inaccurate, not least because 
>> many nodes are shared with highways etc. despite the written descriptions 
>> clearly stating "...it follows the edge..." (Yorkshire Dales was mostly 
>> clean of shared nodes but Lake District did have shared nodes/ways before, 
>> hence A6 road got broken - partially fixed by another mapper)
> 
> Before doing anything else I'd mention the issue (tactfully) to the mapper 
> who did the change, perhaps on a changeset discussion.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> ___
> 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