Re: [Talk-GB] Schools and OSM

[Dan S]

Well fwiw, the curriculum here
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-geography-programmes-of-study
mentions GIS but doesn't give much detail...

Dan



2013/12/31 Tom Chance :
> Well spotted! Getting a hold of the curriculum materials would be a good
> place to start, so we could look for opportunities for them to learn about
> OSM.
>
> Regards,
> Tom
>
>
> On 31 December 2013 11:05, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone
>>
>> I've just read in a magazine that GIS is now specified in the new
>> geography curriculum from Key Stage 3 through to A levels, which means 3.5
>> milllion 11-18 year olds ned to learn about GIS. ESRI already have a Schools
>> programme in place to take advantage of this.
>>
>> Is this an opportunity for OpenStreetMap?  How would we start?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>
> ___
> 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] OSM in Linux Format magazine

[Dan S]

Hi all,

Congrats to whoever wrote the tutorial (probably on this list ;)

Linux Format is a quality magazine. I've written for them before - if
you have an idea for something else the readers might like, you can
simply pitch it to them, so get thinking. (e.g. a tutorial on setting
up Tilemill and producing your own map styles... or...)

Best
Dan


2014/1/17 Paul Williams :
> I'd like to report that there is not one - but two articles about OSM in the
> February 2014 issue of Linux Format magazine (this is actually the issue on
> sale now, in February they'll be selling the March issue!). This is the
> second time I've seen an OSM article in this magazine - there was previously
> one in November 2012.
>
> Firstly there is a two page question and answer style "What on Earth is
> OpenStreetMap" article, and then there is a four page tutorial on how to
> contribute to OpenStreetMap. In addition, on the "Who we are" section of
> page 3 it asks the magazine's writers "what kind of map they would like to
> make" - such as a "map of all local pubs, with a comprehensive guide to the
> available snacks" and to map "the hidden depths of Hull".
>
> Available now from all good newsagents (or at least from WHSmith) for £6.49.
>
> Cheers,
> Paul Williams
> (Paul The Archivist)
>
> ___
> 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] Bitcoin business listings

[Dan S]

Hi all,

In this context I'd like to mention this edge-case seen by Amaroussi last week:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Amaroussi/diary/20772

Best
Dan

2014/1/22 Tom Chance :
> Thanks for the comments, everyone, I never like to delete data unless I'm
> really sure it's inappropriate. It's very annoying when your work is deleted
> by somebody with a bee in their bonnet!
>
> Tom
>
>
> On 22 January 2014 17:12, Derick Rethans  wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Tom Chance wrote:
>>
>> > Has anyone else noticed these? I'm inclined to contact the user
>> > explaining why I think he/she should delete the node. I wouldn't want
>> > to see OSM fill up with pointless info like this.
>>
>> Just delete it. It's another form of spam, just like the user who put a
>> business on Trafalgar Square :-/
>>
>> cheers,
>> Derick
>>
>> --
>> http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
>> Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
>> twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
>> Posted with an email client that doesn't mangle email: alpine
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>
> ___
> 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] UK Open Government Licence

[Dan S]

2014-01-25 Matthijs Melissen :
> On 24 January 2014 11:00, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
>  wrote:
>> If you read to the end of the OGL, you'll find that it helpfully says:
>>
>> "These terms are compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution
>> License 4.0 and the Open Data Commons Attribution License, both of
>> which license copyright and database rights. This means that when the
>> Information is adapted and licensed under either of those licences,
>> you automatically satisfy the conditions of the OGL when you comply
>> with the other licence."
>>
>> So you can be confident that if you have data under the OGL then you
>> would have sufficient rights to allow re-distribution under the ODC-By
>> licence, which in turn implies it's ok for OSM to distribute it under
>> the ODbL.
>
> One thing that confuses me is how different licenses that require
> attribution can be compatible, or even how a work under one license
> requiring attribution can be re-used under that same license. The OGL
> requires the attribution 'Contains public sector information licensed
> under the Open Government Licence v2.0' (or a more specific
> attribution). Openstreetmap requires '© OpenStreetMap contributors'.
> So if someone re-uses Openstreetmap data that contains OGL data and
> only attributes it with '© OpenStreetMap contributors', would that not
> be a violation of the license of the OGL data, because the government
> is not attributed? Can someone clarify that?

In the example you give, the OGL means that OpenStreetMap has to
attribute the government, but the OGL does not require that
OpenStreetMap should force that same requirement onto anyone who uses
OpenStreetMap data. The requirement to attribute the government is not
"inherited". Similarly, the ODbL requires that if I produce a pretty
picture made from OpenStreetMap data, I have to attribute
OpenStreetMap, but I do not have to force any users of my picture to
also attribute OpenStreetMap.

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Open Government Licence

[Dan S]

2014-01-25 SK53 :
> Agree, we also have both OGL 1.0 (e.g., Natural England) and OGL 2.0 (e.g,
> OSGB).
>
> I've been reading the licenses again, and I think the main sticking point is
> the viral attribution clause.
> [...snip...]

I don't want to divert from Jerry's main points, but I just want to
make sure no-one misreads his reply the same way I just did. The OGL
does not have any viral attribution clause - which happens to be the
point I was making in my reply to Matthijs earlier today! It's the
Ordnance Survey's version of OGL which has a viral attribution clause.
I agree with Jerry's analysis, but I note that there's no _viral_
attribution when using data that is under the standard OGL (and is
uncontaminated by any second-hand OSGB content).

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] POI features: node vs way?

[Dan S]

Hi -

Definitely you should _not_ tag both the polygon and a node. That
creates two objects, and many systems will then think there are two
pubs!

This is articulated in this principle:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

If you have a need for POIs as point features, simply convert all
relevant ways/relations into nodes while populating your database.
It's very easy to calculate the centroid (average position) of nodes
in a way.

Dan

2014-01-26 Nick Whitelegg :
>
> Hi,
>
> Have noticed here in the UK an increasing tendency to tag polygons rather
> than points with the "POI" tags e.g. amenity=pub, railway=station.
>
> This is good for many uses, however in some use cases (e.g. my own, I have a
> need to populate a database with POIs as point features) it can cause
> difficulty.
>
> What is the general recommendation in this case? Tag both the polygon
> (building) and one of its nodes as amenity=pub, etc?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> ___
> 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] Use of leisure=sports_centre at Silverstone etc

[Dan S]

leisure=stadium is appropriate for these?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dstadium

Dan

2014-02-01 SK53 :
> Today whilst moving bugs over from OpenStreetBugs  I noticed that the
> Silverstone GP circuit is tagged leisure=sports_centre and Huntingdon
> Racecourse is tagged with leisure=track.
>
> Whereas it is true that Silverstone is a centre for a sport, my
> understanding is that leisure=sports_centre is usually used to map
> buildings, usually run by councils, which offer a range of facilities for
> different sports. Associated playing fields are usually mapped as
> leisure=recreation_ground.
>
> Similarly leisure=track is comprehensible to me, but would not make sense to
> any automated processing of tag values.
>
> I've muttered before about how extending the meaning of a tag usually
> degrades the tags value. In this case indiscriminate use of sports_centre
> means that OSM no longer becomes suitable for examining things like access
> to sports facilites by the general public.
>
> The other thing that this highlights is the potential need for a generic
> landuse type tag for areas devoted to some sporting purpose. I've noted this
> before in the US where people have taken to marking the in-bound areas of a
> ski resort with leisure=recreation_ground.
>
> Any thoughts,
>
> Jerry
>
> ___
> 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] Somerset Levels Flooding

[Dan S]

Hi -

I do add temporary things such as road closures, construction sites.
Generally only if it will be there "for a while", e.g. a month or
more. I agree with Brian's perspective.

Dan


2014-02-06 Brian Savidge :
> I thought temporary information like closures of paths and roads were good
> to put on the map, if nothing else to allow routing to avoid them.
>
> The water I agree is likely to be a bit inaccurate and isn't going to help
> with the routing, but like a road, those areas will be wet for quite some
> time (weeks to months), so as long as the person doing it keeps it
> relatively up to date, I guess there is no real problem.  The real problem
> comes when its not maintained.
>
>> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 00:24:31 +
>> From: dave...@madasafish.com
>> To: talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> About a week ago user Jestr88 added large areas tagged natural=water;
>> name=flooding. to indicate the flooded areas on the Somerset levels.
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258412163
>>
>> Apart from the inaccuracy of these (water levels vary hourly) I thought
>> temporary information was frowned upon. I think they should be removed
>> or am I missing something?
>>
>> 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
>
> ___
> 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] Urban Data Hack, London, Feb 15th/16th

[Dan S]

Hi all -

Urban Data Hack, London, Feb 15th/16th, possibly interesting to people here:
http://urbandatahack.com/
They have some specific datasets to work with, not osm but geo.

(Is it appropriate to post this kind of thing on talk-gb ? I'm not
associated with the event, but just wondering if this kind of thing is
interest to this list.)

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] BIS report on open national address data

[Dan S]

Nice to see the recommendation. I guess from an OSM point of view, one
of the most important responses to make would be to ensure that the
basic free product is truly OGL, free of any more restricted content
(e.g. OSOGL) that could hold back beneficial uses of the data?

Dan


2014-02-13 13:35 GMT+00:00 Andrew Gray :
> Spotted this today and thought it would be interesting from an OSM 
> perspective:
>
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/an-open-national-address-gazetteer
>
> "There have been long standing calls for the government to treat
> address data as a national asset that is free to use and re-use.
> People argue that the wider economic and social benefits are likely to
> far outweigh the costs, while recognising that there are quality,
> maintenance, commercial, legal and financial issues to be resolved."
>
> "This review analyses current products and considers of user
> requirements and options for open addresses. It is based on open data
> principles that public information should be accessible and freely
> available to the widest number of government and non-government
> organisations. It looks at current address products and market
> structures. The review also considers the potential for efficiencies
> and cost savings in current practice."
>
> Executive summary:
>
> "UK society relies heavily on address data and current products have
> helped greatly to create benefit. The review has determined that Open
> usage would result in substantial and valuable growth among new user
> types and with even greater community benefit. The recommendation is
> that a basic address product should be free to all users at the point
> of use under the Open Government Licence while premium versions would
> still be sold, leaving current production and maintenance roles much
> as they are today."
>
> They're looking for comments and responses.
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] Crowdsourced boats to map the seas : BBC Article - video

[Dan S]

Hi all -

I went and asked them about data licencing. They're not going the
open-data route - essentially personal use only, so they can reserve
the ability to charge for some uses.

For interest, here's the description of the European grant which
helped them develop their crowdsourcing:
http://www.gsa.europa.eu/coastal-surveying-depths-egnos-enhance-charts
(NB it's not just a "pure" research grant but a commercial development thing.)

Best
Dan


2014-02-18 9:19 GMT+00:00 Bob Kerr :
> Hi,
>
> Short video on crowndsourcing using GPS and depth guages from the BBC, 
> suggests they will release the data
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26231350
>
> Cheers
>
> Bob
>
> ___
> 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] W3C Invitation

[Dan S]

Interesting application. Since none of the objects in OSM are
guaranteed permanent, I expect the way to do it would be for trees in
OSM to have ref=* which crossreferences some external database (rather
than trying to build a permanent URI scheme pointing at OSM features).
Or maybe the key uri=* - if you look at taginfo you'll see that
there's a decent amount of stable URI references in there, although
there are also some general-purpose URLs:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=uri#values
It appears someone at Southampton University has been attaching URIs
to buildings/rooms etc, and separately (?) some bus-stops have
data.gov.uk URIs - if you can find those people and whether they've
written anything about their use-case that would be a nice starting
point for comparison.

Best
Dan

2014-03-04 13:37 GMT+00:00 Tom Chance :
> I could possibly do this, I've done various projects to do with mapping
> trees and know a fair amount about tree and climate change policy. But I'm
> not an expert on the underlying OSM data model and API. If anyone wanted to
> chip in thoughts on stable URIs I'm all ears.
>
> Tom
>
>
> On 4 March 2014 08:33, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone
>>
>> We have an invitation from IBM to present at this meeting- suggested topic
>> is below. Anyone up for this - either with the topic suggested or with a
>> suitable alternative?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> A few weeks ago, we had a use case webinar with the CIO of the City of
>> Palo Alto who told us about an local initiative to tag trees with lat/long,
>> genus, size, etc.  During the call, we asked him if he also considered
>> tagging the trees with URI's and of course he hadn't.  Following the call a
>> colleague sent me an article about how tree roots often damage natural gas
>> lines and lead to widespread gas leaks.  Methane is 20x more dangerous as a
>> greenhouse gas than CO2, so gas leaks are a leading cause of global warming.
>>
>> We would like to find an openstreetmaps speaker who can talk about the
>> value of mapping trees and gas lines, and many other things, with URI's.
>> Would you be able to discuss this?
>>
>> We will be meeting on March 31 and April 1 at IBM Southbank, and would
>> love a presentation/discussion the morning or late afternoon of the 31st.
>> Would this topic and date fit?
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>
> ___
> 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] Selection of zoom area.

[Dan S]

Hi Lester,

I'd suggest using the Leaflet javascript library to embed your maps:
 They have some simple usage examples on the
site, and when you want to zoom the map to a particular bounding-box,
you can use a single javascript call "map.fitbounds()" which
you could put directly into your left-hand links.


Best
Dan

2014-04-03 22:33 GMT+01:00 Lester Caine :
> I'm in the process of moving a site from using google to OSM, but I'm
> looking at doing something a little different to my normal setups.
>
> http://espc.lsces.org.uk/wiki/Coverage+Area is as far as I have got, and the
> left hand links drop over to OSM, but obviously I'd like to get the right
> hand map updating. Can anybody suggest an example I can crib to get it
> working?
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
> ___
> 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] newbie questions about building outlines

[Dan S]

2014-04-30 9:52 GMT+01:00 Ed Loach :
> Tom wrote:
>
>> In many other areas of inner London, particularly residential (e.g. 
>> http://binged.it/1iByiPy),
>> the typologies and shapes are pretty easy to understand from aerial imagery 
>> so you
>> can accurately guess individual buildings.
>
> Perhaps it is just me, but I don’t think residential buildings without 
> addresses are worth adding to OSM, and you can’t get addresses without a 
> survey (or spot the odd business that may be hidden amongst them).

While building outlines are not particularly interesting in
themselves, I've been surprised when doing address surveying that it
makes a massive difference to the task: having outlines to work to
(and occasionally, to fix) really speeds up my address surveying. So
like others have said, I now try to get buildings sketched in from
aerials beforehand.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Oxford spam

[Dan S]

Hi Frederik,

Thanks for checking. I've only been down that street a couple of
times, but there are in fact shops there. It's not "right inside" All
Souls College, it's street-facing - I don't know the shop but I feel
quite content that what we have here is a true shop-mapping. The shop
website lists an address which matches.

However, "opening_hours=24/7" is probably wrong. The user probably did
that because the shop has an online presence, but I bet they operate
standard shop opening hours at the address. Anyone confirm?

Dan

2014-05-02 8:39 GMT+01:00 Frederik Ramm :
> Hi,
>
>I have recieved a spam complaint about this:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22059155#map=4/40.25/36.56
>
> It seems that the author has {accidentally,ingenuously} added a faraway
> node to the changeset which makes the box look big, but the only edit
> was in fact adding a shop which might be slightly mis-tagged and
> possibly mis-placed as it claims to be right inside All Souls College
> but I hesitate to simply delete it without local knowledge; maybe
> someone in Oxford can trim/fix/delete this as required.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> 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] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data

[Dan S]

2014-05-15 8:27 GMT+01:00 Steven Horner :
> Thank you all for the advice, although it may have confused me all the more 
> with different suggestions.
>
> Personally I like Marc's suggestion of using the 2 street names separated by 
> a hyphen. This allows both names to be rendered.

Seems OK to me (though I would have chosen slash, but whatever), and
we can fondly hope that renderers will one day detect the "name:left"
and "name:right" tags and render those cleverly when found.

> Then identifying each street with left and right tags. How do you chose which 
> is which if the road runs East to West?

Use the direction of the way, i.e. the direction in which the OSM
object was drawn.

> I'm amazed this doesn't crop up constantly, any old terraced streets with a 
> road separating them would have the issue. I can think of about a dozen 
> streets within 1 mile of me where this is the case.
>
> I will do some more investigation and look at several different mapped areas 
> to see how they have been tagged, doesn't sound like there is a definitive 
> answer.

When I sometimes encountered it, I "solved" the problem by putting the
different streetnames on the building addresses, and ignoring the
issue on the way itself. I wasn't aware of "name:left" etc!

Dan


>> Let me first introduce myself, I'm a Belgian mapper that has been lurking 
>> for a few months on this mailing list. The reason is that I want to learn 
>> how other communities work and which problems they have and how they solve 
>> them.
>>
>> Now back to the topic: in Belgium it's quite common to have streets with two 
>> names, at least when they are on the border of two villages. The Belgian 
>> community decided to map this as follows:
>> name =  name1 -  name2
>> name:left = name1
>> name:right = name2
>>
>> An example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207455046
>>
>> What are your thoughts about this ?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> m
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:07 PM, SK53  wrote:
>>>
>>> There are at least two major streets in the middle of Nottingham like this: 
>>> logically the street does not have a name, the sides of the street have 
>>> names:
>>>
>>> North of the Council House, the S side is Smith Row, the N side is Long Row
>>> South of the Council House, the S side is Poultry, the N side Cheapside 
>>> (originally Rotten Row)
>>>
>>> These names originate as locations in the market square, as can be seen by 
>>> other survivals such as Beastmarket Hill. Where the square is now an open 
>>> plaza the name of the rows of buildings have been transferred to the 
>>> thoroughfare. The addresses on Cheapside are even more complex because the 
>>> shops also have entrances in Exchange Arcade and are let as units of this 
>>> shopping arcade. The Austin Reed shop appears to have at least 4 addresses 
>>> from the Royal Mail, OS, Nottingham council & Austin Reed website: all in 
>>> all a mess.
>>>
>>> Other places where this occurs include: Sherwin Road/Castle Boulevard, 
>>> where the W end of Sherwin Road has houses with Castle Boulevard addresses 
>>> on the S side. In this case I resolved it by tagging the footpath with the 
>>> Caste Boulevard name. This discrepancy arose because the two roads were 
>>> merged when the roundabout was built in the 1920s.
>>>
>>> I recently noticed a case where the Land Registry data for a small new 
>>> build terrace had been resolved by using the name of the terrace as a 
>>> building name. Fail. In some towns (Bangor, N. Wales, comes to mind) many 
>>> houses were built as named terraces with numbers within the terrace. 
>>> Although Bangor has been relatively recently house-numbered a simple 
>>> inspection of addresses painted on rubbish bins suggests that the original 
>>> addresses are still in use.
>>>
>>> Broadly speaking we should try and do this better than the OS Open Data 
>>> because it does happen fairly frequently. name:left and name:right can be 
>>> used even if no-one consumes them at present. It is useful to try and map 
>>> addresses in such cases, and these are the one case where I am happy to use 
>>> the associatedStreet relation. This at least enables the correct grouping 
>>> of entities for the 'street'.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the challenge is twofold:
>>>
>>> Persuading people that streets with addresses might not be named. (The 
>>> Royal Mail seems generally to adopt a Procrustean solution to force 
>>> everything to fit PAF).
>>> Working out how to consume such data (mainly for rendering).
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 May 2014 10:07, Richard Mann  
>>> wrote:

 There's one like that in Oxford (for about 30 metres) - street addresses 
 different on the two sides. For the moment it has name="St Clements 
 Street", alt_name="London Place", and a separate footway with name="London 
 Place" (plus a name:note).

 So my suggestion - draw separate footways, and give them names. Use 
 name/alt_name on the road, or name = "one name / other name" if bo

[Talk-GB] UK postcodes on each side of the road

[Dan S]

Hi all,

In my area the council does a handy thing: they mark postcodes on the
lampposts. So I've been noting them down for mapping. However, it's a
curse as well as a blessing...

Of course lampposts are not identical with segments-of-streets, nor
with building-addresses, so it's rarely clear where to draw the
boundaries. But my main problem is that they often indicate different
postcodes on each side of the road. Firstly, is that normal? And
secondly, how to tag? I was hoping to attach postcodes to streets (or
parts of streets). One thing I could do is just put postcodes on the
home addresses I add (rather than on the streets), and only in the
cases where it's clear from the lampposts.

Thanks
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM session at Wikimania 2014

[Dan S]

Congrats Andy, I hope it goes well.

I've been surprised by the fairly strong resistance to bot edits in
OSM, which I believe are pretty common in wikipedia (?). I personally
think they're a good thing as long as they're doing uncontroversial
stuff, but I guess you may need to factor that into your plans.

But anyway that's not feedback on the talk. The abstract looks good
and I hope you convert a few more wikimedians!

Dan

2014-06-02 12:11 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett :
> I've had a session pitch accepted, to speak about OSM at Wikimania
> 2014 (the annual Wikipedia/ Wikimedia conference; their equivalent of
> "State of the map"), held this year in London, in August.. My pitch is
> at:
>
>
> http://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/OpenStreetMap_-_what_is_it_and_what_does_it_mean_for_Wikimedians%3F
>
> Any suggestions for other things I should include will be welcome, and
> I hope to meet some of you there.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] Adding links to Wikidata (and Wikipedia?)

[Dan S]

Hi Andy,

I like the idea, and it'd be great if some dabbling happened in
advance of wikimania. I'm not promising to get involved (sorry) since
not sure I'll have time.

But I have no idea how to do a structured search in wikipedia (i.e.
search for items within a category, which have co-ordinates). If you
know any way, or tutorials etc, then sharing those might help OSMers
to think about it?

I've added some quick findings about this, to the discussion:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Pigsonthewing/Wikipedia#How_to_query_Wikipedia

Dan

2014-06-08 14:44 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett :
> A year or so ago, I raised a proposal for a bot to add links from OSM
> entities, to the equivalent entities in Wikidata. Details are at:
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Pigsonthewing/Wikipedia
>
> While there was some interest, things haven't moved very far (I'm not
> a coder, so am reliant on others).
>
> To make a more manageable project, we could perhaps run the job just
> for the UK (or even a subset of that); and perhaps for a subject of
> topics (starting with churches, say, or bridges, or railway stations,
> or whatever). Once success is demonstrated, it could then be
> replicated for more topics; and in other territories.
>
> Can anyone assist? How can we increase community buy-in?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] Fwd: In mainland Britain, you are never more than 34 miles from a pub.

[Dan S]

Hi all,

In mainland Britain, you are never more than 34 miles from a pub.
http://mcld.co.uk/feet-from-a-rat/pub.html

And luckily, in mainland Britain, you are never more than 30 miles
from a public toilet.
http://mcld.co.uk/feet-from-a-rat/public-toilet.html

:)

Dan

P.S. This is the thing I was talking about at the last London pub night

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Duff data on facebook

[Dan S]

2014-06-09 14:40 GMT+01:00 Lester Caine :
> On 09/06/14 12:37, Richard Symonds wrote:
>> Facebook updates the places it has using crowdsourced information from
>> here: https://www.facebook.com/places/editor?ref=br_tf.
>>
>> I'm afraid that's all I know...
>
> All of my posts to that from 10 months ago are still showing as
> 'pending' ... yet the corrections have been replaced by further links to
> Gloucestershire :(
> Croudsourcing only works if there is someone bothering to fix the
> problems ...

Or maybe crowdsourcing only works if the organiser is willing to give
the crowd a morsel of actual power. That's the difference between
crowdsourcing and crowdserfing:
http://derickrethans.nl/google-map-maker.html

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: In mainland Britain, you are never more than 34 miles from a pub.

[Dan S]

2014-06-11 21:52 GMT+01:00 Craig Wallace :
> On 2014-06-08 16:28, Dan S wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In mainland Britain, you are never more than 34 miles from a pub.
>> http://mcld.co.uk/feet-from-a-rat/pub.html
>>
>> And luckily, in mainland Britain, you are never more than 30 miles
>> from a public toilet.
>> http://mcld.co.uk/feet-from-a-rat/public-toilet.html
>
>
> Several of the calculations seem to be including the Mull as part of
> mainland Britain, ie churches and golf courses. It is definitely an island.

Thanks. I intended to exclude it but didn't quite - now fixed.

> As for public toilets, must be a few missing from the map. I think there's
> toilets in Thurso and Bettyhill, though it has been a few years since I
> visited these.

Yes - I didn't actually plan this as a nudge to update the north of
Scotland! But if anyone does help fill in some gaps that it reveals,
that would be neat.

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] cannot update wiki page

[Dan S]

Probably this: https://twitter.com/openstreetmap/status/484262677653766144

2014-07-02 12:29 GMT+01:00 Barry Cornelius :
> I'm trying to update:
>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_local_councils
> I click on "Save page", type in the captcha code, click on "Save page". The
> browser goes to:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=UK_local_councils&action=submit
>
> I then get:
>Could not open socket
>
> I've tried a few times in the last 10 minutes.
>
> --
> Barry Cornelius
> http://www.northeastraces.com/
> http://www.oxonraces.com/
> http://www.rowmaps.com/
> http://www.thehs2.com/
> http://www.oxonpaths.com/
> http://www.barrycornelius.com/
>
>
> ___
> 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] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM

[Dan S]

You know, rather than thinking about automatically importing any of
their data into OSM, my intuition is that given the concerns about OS
copyright, plus how much OSMers enjoy mapping new features, I'd
suggest using their data to create a web feed of "Hot new roads for
mappers to go and survey!" - I bet they'd all be mapped within a week
;)

Dan

2014-07-03 18:41 GMT+01:00 John Baker :
>
> Yeah I know we are pretty good at adding them. But this discussion started
> with the HA because there were roads that were not on OSM.
>
> It was this project that he was working on.
> http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/a23-handcross-to-warninglid/
>
> So I personally added this in a rough way based on the descriptions from him
> who was on site at the time and the plans that were there (I didn't trace
> them just looked at them).
>
> I don't (for a change) want to get into conversation about tracing imagery
> vs. doing it by hand. The point is what can we use.
>
> My thought were that if there plans were based on the OS streetview (rather
> than the more detailed ones) then we could use them.
>
>
>> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 18:23:34 +0100
>> From: o...@raggedred.net
>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM
>>
>> On 03/07/14 17:51, John Baker wrote:
>> > The first thing I am worried about is the copyright of the various
>> > plans. Some/many seem to be derived from OS maps.
>>
>> A legitimate concern.
>> >
>> > Now I am no expert on the copyright situation here and dialogue is
>> > difficult they know little about OSM really. He just said we release
>> > the plans and they are public domain.
>>
>> There is no mechanism in the UK for a body like the Highways Agency to
>> release data as PD. That is a mechanism used in countries like the US.
>> In the UK the info would have to be licensed using a specific licence,
>> such as the Open Government Licence. If the plans are based on OS maps
>> then OS would have to agree to release this, according to OS's
>> interpretation of copyright law. OS probably will not agree to this, but
>> it is worth asking :-).
>>
>> Without a suitably agreed licence we cannot trace such plans into OSM.
>> You could visit the site and get GPS traces & photos to add such works
>> to OSM, which is usually what happens as soon as a new road gets opened.
>>
>> I'd be interested if the Highway's Agency have opened new roads and they
>> are not included in OSM very soon after. That seems to me to be
>> something we are pretty good at.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers, Chris
>> user: chillly
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM

[Dan S]

OK sorry, I shouldn't have said "automatically importing", that was a
misrepresentation. But I didn't intend negativity, I thought I was
offering a positive suggestion of how to work with their data! Yes of
course the news in your email was great to see, it would definitely be
lovely to have their plans as an imagery layer. And good point about
the under-construction roads.

Dan

2014-07-03 21:36 GMT+01:00 John Baker :
> I am a little surprised at the negativity. I would have thought it would be
> welcomed that the highway agency want to engage with OSM to help get the
> most up-to-date map available. I thought we prided ourselves of having the
> most up-to-date map.
>
> We currently have roads under construction (and proposed but I have avoided
> adding these with my chats with the HA as things can change) in OSM.
>
> I am confused as how you think people get these into OSM in the first place.
> Often they already use sources (I see it in the source tags often and I have
> been looking over the last few weeks at many of these proposed and
> constructed roads to get a feel about what the data is like) like the
> highway agency for England for the major roads.
>
> What I want to do is streamline and improve this process as mappers in the
> UK (it might not be you) do use these resources already. And often they
> guess from the information available if proper detailed aligned detailed
> plans existed that would be much better and easier too. Maybe these mappers
> are not on this list. *shrug*
>
> If there was a system/process in place that had accurate plans (allowed
> copyright) and timelines from an authorised source when construction began,
> when the road is opened, etc. We could use this. How we use it is a
> different matter - maybe someone wants to survey it, maybe someone wants to
> trace it.
>
> I have visions of mappers jumping fences and running under the cover of
> darkness down half built roads with their expensive GPS devices just to get
> the info in OSM.
>
> Personally I think already showing on the map a road under construction is
> way more informative that simply adding a note. Once it opens then someone
> can make it 'live'.
>
> I am not "automatically importing" anything here. It is not about that.
>
> Maybe it is just down to "how much OSMers enjoy mapping new features" in
> their area.
>
>
>> From: sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk
>> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 20:30:15 +0100
>> To: danstowell+...@gmail.com
>> CC: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM
>>
>> Maybe a simple method is to use the OSM notes system, which is what the
>> feature was designed for?
>>
>> Shaun
>>
>> On 3 Jul 2014, at 19:10, Dan S  wrote:
>>
>> > You know, rather than thinking about automatically importing any of
>> > their data into OSM, my intuition is that given the concerns about OS
>> > copyright, plus how much OSMers enjoy mapping new features, I'd
>> > suggest using their data to create a web feed of "Hot new roads for
>> > mappers to go and survey!" - I bet they'd all be mapped within a week
>> > ;)
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> > 2014-07-03 18:41 GMT+01:00 John Baker :
>> >>
>> >> Yeah I know we are pretty good at adding them. But this discussion
>> >> started
>> >> with the HA because there were roads that were not on OSM.
>> >>
>> >> It was this project that he was working on.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/a23-handcross-to-warninglid/
>> >>
>> >> So I personally added this in a rough way based on the descriptions
>> >> from him
>> >> who was on site at the time and the plans that were there (I didn't
>> >> trace
>> >> them just looked at them).
>> >>
>> >> I don't (for a change) want to get into conversation about tracing
>> >> imagery
>> >> vs. doing it by hand. The point is what can we use.
>> >>
>> >> My thought were that if there plans were based on the OS streetview
>> >> (rather
>> >> than the more detailed ones) then we could use them.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 18:23:34 +0100
>> >>> From: o...@raggedred.net
>> >>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>> >>
>> >>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM
>> >>>
>> >>> On 03/07/14 17:51, John 

Re: [Talk-GB] User joining up roundabouts

[Dan S]

I think I noticed "mentor" is often on the #osm IRC channel, recently
at least. That might be a way to make contact, assuming it's the same
person.

Best
Dan

2014-07-09 0:59 GMT+01:00 Dave F. :
> Hi
>
> User mentor has been "Fix roles and order parts of route" in my area, This
> includes erroneously joining roundabouts sections into complete circles that
> were previously split to accurately apply multipolygon routes to them. You
> may wish to check if he's done similar edits in your area. I'm afraid I've
> given up contacting him as he fails to reply & tbh have run out of polite
> things to say to him as a majority of his edits need some form of reversion
> & I'm getting bored of doing it.
>
> 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

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

[Talk-GB] osm 10th birthday: press

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I'm looking forward to OSM's 10th birthday. It occurred to me that we
should perhaps use it as a potential opportunity for some press
coverage, ideally to get press coverage outside the usual tech/gis
world. To do this we'd need some kind of event which makes a story.

There are already plans for OSM birthday celebrations/meetups, and
that's all good. I'm NOT talking about a social event but some event,
perhaps even just brief, as long as it's got something that might
appeal in a soft-news kind of sense. And maybe in London, since London
is the birthplace of OSM.

A couple of ideas:

* We could organise a march following the route of the first ever GPS
track (carrying Steve Coast aloft, sitting crosslegged on a splashmap)

* We could visit the first ever tea-shop added to OSM, then the first
ever park, then of course the first ever pub. We could give a plaque
to each place to commemorate its place in history.

To make it a press-worthy event, it needs to be something that we can
write a press-release about in advance, and it needs to be something
photogenic. So let's get more creative...

* We could 3D-print a candle in the shape of all the OSM nodes in
London! and put it on top of an earth-shaped cake!

* We could print out a map of London at 1:1 scale...

Anyone interested in working on something? Anyone got crazier ideas than me?

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] osm 10th birthday: press

[Dan S]

This is looking like a "no". So let's just do our own celebrations
without other people watching :)

Dan

2014-07-23 21:23 GMT+01:00 Dan S :
> Hi all,
>
> I'm looking forward to OSM's 10th birthday. It occurred to me that we
> should perhaps use it as a potential opportunity for some press
> coverage, ideally to get press coverage outside the usual tech/gis
> world. To do this we'd need some kind of event which makes a story.
>
> There are already plans for OSM birthday celebrations/meetups, and
> that's all good. I'm NOT talking about a social event but some event,
> perhaps even just brief, as long as it's got something that might
> appeal in a soft-news kind of sense. And maybe in London, since London
> is the birthplace of OSM.
>
> A couple of ideas:
>
> * We could organise a march following the route of the first ever GPS
> track (carrying Steve Coast aloft, sitting crosslegged on a splashmap)
>
> * We could visit the first ever tea-shop added to OSM, then the first
> ever park, then of course the first ever pub. We could give a plaque
> to each place to commemorate its place in history.
>
> To make it a press-worthy event, it needs to be something that we can
> write a press-release about in advance, and it needs to be something
> photogenic. So let's get more creative...
>
> * We could 3D-print a candle in the shape of all the OSM nodes in
> London! and put it on top of an earth-shaped cake!
>
> * We could print out a map of London at 1:1 scale...
>
> Anyone interested in working on something? Anyone got crazier ideas than me?
>
> Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] osm 10th birthday: press

[Dan S]

Grant,

Yes! Thanks for starting this. I've taken the liberty of being very
bold. I've changed the tone to how press releases are normally written
(essentially, written as if it was a newspaper article by a third
party unconnected with osm), and I've even changed two of the
paragraphs to appear as verbal quotes from you. I hope that's OK - it
may seem a weird thing to do but it's good for press releases, helps
give some life to the text and journalists would reuse the quote to
give some life to the article.

Can anyone help to update the stats please? We have "raw" stats like
number of users, number of ways, but more interesting for journalists
would be "kilometres of roads" etc - see some of the notes in that
document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit?usp=sharing

Dan

2014-07-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Grant Slater :
> Hi All,
>
> OK, lets be crazy and try crowd source a 10th Birthday press release:
> Draft here, be bold, anyone can edit:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Grant
>
>
> On 23 July 2014 21:23, Dan S  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm looking forward to OSM's 10th birthday. It occurred to me that we
>> should perhaps use it as a potential opportunity for some press
>> coverage, ideally to get press coverage outside the usual tech/gis
>> world. To do this we'd need some kind of event which makes a story.
>>
>> There are already plans for OSM birthday celebrations/meetups, and
>> that's all good. I'm NOT talking about a social event but some event,
>> perhaps even just brief, as long as it's got something that might
>> appeal in a soft-news kind of sense. And maybe in London, since London
>> is the birthplace of OSM.
>>
>> A couple of ideas:
>>
>> * We could organise a march following the route of the first ever GPS
>> track (carrying Steve Coast aloft, sitting crosslegged on a splashmap)
>>
>> * We could visit the first ever tea-shop added to OSM, then the first
>> ever park, then of course the first ever pub. We could give a plaque
>> to each place to commemorate its place in history.
>>
>> To make it a press-worthy event, it needs to be something that we can
>> write a press-release about in advance, and it needs to be something
>> photogenic. So let's get more creative...
>>
>> * We could 3D-print a candle in the shape of all the OSM nodes in
>> London! and put it on top of an earth-shaped cake!
>>
>> * We could print out a map of London at 1:1 scale...
>>
>> Anyone interested in working on something? Anyone got crazier ideas than me?
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> ___
>> 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] osm 10th birthday: press

[Dan S]

You are! Or someone else. :) Are you in a position to help? Please add
target press to the document if you have any suggestions.

I wonder if UCL press office would be interested, since Steve Coast
was at UCL when it started, and UCL has been supportive of OSM over
the years. Is there a UCL+OSM person who might chat to their press
office?

Dan


2014-07-28 9:49 GMT+01:00 Brian Prangle :
> Who's going to draw up the target list of press platforms to send this to
> and more importantly discover the correct contact?
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
>
> On 27 July 2014 23:20, Dan S  wrote:
>>
>> Grant,
>>
>> Yes! Thanks for starting this. I've taken the liberty of being very
>> bold. I've changed the tone to how press releases are normally written
>> (essentially, written as if it was a newspaper article by a third
>> party unconnected with osm), and I've even changed two of the
>> paragraphs to appear as verbal quotes from you. I hope that's OK - it
>> may seem a weird thing to do but it's good for press releases, helps
>> give some life to the text and journalists would reuse the quote to
>> give some life to the article.
>>
>> Can anyone help to update the stats please? We have "raw" stats like
>> number of users, number of ways, but more interesting for journalists
>> would be "kilometres of roads" etc - see some of the notes in that
>> document:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> 2014-07-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Grant Slater :
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > OK, lets be crazy and try crowd source a 10th Birthday press release:
>> > Draft here, be bold, anyone can edit:
>> >
>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit?usp=sharing
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Grant
>> >
>> >
>> > On 23 July 2014 21:23, Dan S  wrote:
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> I'm looking forward to OSM's 10th birthday. It occurred to me that we
>> >> should perhaps use it as a potential opportunity for some press
>> >> coverage, ideally to get press coverage outside the usual tech/gis
>> >> world. To do this we'd need some kind of event which makes a story.
>> >>
>> >> There are already plans for OSM birthday celebrations/meetups, and
>> >> that's all good. I'm NOT talking about a social event but some event,
>> >> perhaps even just brief, as long as it's got something that might
>> >> appeal in a soft-news kind of sense. And maybe in London, since London
>> >> is the birthplace of OSM.
>> >>
>> >> A couple of ideas:
>> >>
>> >> * We could organise a march following the route of the first ever GPS
>> >> track (carrying Steve Coast aloft, sitting crosslegged on a splashmap)
>> >>
>> >> * We could visit the first ever tea-shop added to OSM, then the first
>> >> ever park, then of course the first ever pub. We could give a plaque
>> >> to each place to commemorate its place in history.
>> >>
>> >> To make it a press-worthy event, it needs to be something that we can
>> >> write a press-release about in advance, and it needs to be something
>> >> photogenic. So let's get more creative...
>> >>
>> >> * We could 3D-print a candle in the shape of all the OSM nodes in
>> >> London! and put it on top of an earth-shaped cake!
>> >>
>> >> * We could print out a map of London at 1:1 scale...
>> >>
>> >> Anyone interested in working on something? Anyone got crazier ideas
>> >> than me?
>> >>
>> >> Dan
>> >>
>> >> ___
>> >> 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] osm 10th birthday: press

[Dan S]

OK the press release is looking good, thanks Grant and hive mind!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit

Now: if anyone has ideas of journalists who might be interested,
please could you send me an email? Journalists who have written before
about OSM, or journalists in mainstream media who you think might like
it. Email me offlist to avoid deluging everyone. Send me their contact
details, or if you prefer to make the contact yourself then just let
me know and I'll send the tidied-up press release PDF to you for
forwarding.

Dan


2014-07-28 9:55 GMT+01:00 Dan S :
> You are! Or someone else. :) Are you in a position to help? Please add
> target press to the document if you have any suggestions.
>
> I wonder if UCL press office would be interested, since Steve Coast
> was at UCL when it started, and UCL has been supportive of OSM over
> the years. Is there a UCL+OSM person who might chat to their press
> office?
>
> Dan
>
>
> 2014-07-28 9:49 GMT+01:00 Brian Prangle :
>> Who's going to draw up the target list of press platforms to send this to
>> and more importantly discover the correct contact?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>> On 27 July 2014 23:20, Dan S  wrote:
>>>
>>> Grant,
>>>
>>> Yes! Thanks for starting this. I've taken the liberty of being very
>>> bold. I've changed the tone to how press releases are normally written
>>> (essentially, written as if it was a newspaper article by a third
>>> party unconnected with osm), and I've even changed two of the
>>> paragraphs to appear as verbal quotes from you. I hope that's OK - it
>>> may seem a weird thing to do but it's good for press releases, helps
>>> give some life to the text and journalists would reuse the quote to
>>> give some life to the article.
>>>
>>> Can anyone help to update the stats please? We have "raw" stats like
>>> number of users, number of ways, but more interesting for journalists
>>> would be "kilometres of roads" etc - see some of the notes in that
>>> document:
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>> 2014-07-27 13:55 GMT+01:00 Grant Slater :
>>> > Hi All,
>>> >
>>> > OK, lets be crazy and try crowd source a 10th Birthday press release:
>>> > Draft here, be bold, anyone can edit:
>>> >
>>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NJjR5jZTCFR84apn3UoyzXKUyfkAG3-ceQ9rv1Rg6ZA/edit?usp=sharing
>>> >
>>> > Kind regards,
>>> >
>>> > Grant
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 23 July 2014 21:23, Dan S  wrote:
>>> >> Hi all,
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm looking forward to OSM's 10th birthday. It occurred to me that we
>>> >> should perhaps use it as a potential opportunity for some press
>>> >> coverage, ideally to get press coverage outside the usual tech/gis
>>> >> world. To do this we'd need some kind of event which makes a story.
>>> >>
>>> >> There are already plans for OSM birthday celebrations/meetups, and
>>> >> that's all good. I'm NOT talking about a social event but some event,
>>> >> perhaps even just brief, as long as it's got something that might
>>> >> appeal in a soft-news kind of sense. And maybe in London, since London
>>> >> is the birthplace of OSM.
>>> >>
>>> >> A couple of ideas:
>>> >>
>>> >> * We could organise a march following the route of the first ever GPS
>>> >> track (carrying Steve Coast aloft, sitting crosslegged on a splashmap)
>>> >>
>>> >> * We could visit the first ever tea-shop added to OSM, then the first
>>> >> ever park, then of course the first ever pub. We could give a plaque
>>> >> to each place to commemorate its place in history.
>>> >>
>>> >> To make it a press-worthy event, it needs to be something that we can
>>> >> write a press-release about in advance, and it needs to be something
>>> >> photogenic. So let's get more creative...
>>> >>
>>> >> * We could 3D-print a candle in the shape of all the OSM nodes in
>>> >> London! and put it on top of an earth-shaped cake!
>>> >>
>>> >> * We could print out a map of London at 1:1 scale...
>>> >>
>>> >> Anyone interested in working on something? Anyone got crazier ideas
>>> >> than me?
>>> >>
>>> >> Dan
>>> >>
>>> >> ___
>>> >> 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] City names translation

[Dan S]

Hi -

In general I like interlinking - it reduces maintenance burden, for
example (imagine _manually_ making sure wikidata and osm both were
up-to-date with the same data! oof) - and I support the idea that
there's much data which doesn't "need" to be in OSM. However there's
rarely an objective way to decide which data store the data "needs" to
be in. OSM has already evolved a standard practice for
foreign-language placenames, within OSM, so I think it would be
strange to rule out Pavlo's suggestion purely on the basis that the
data "should" be somewhere else.

I think this discussion has been very helpful in clarifying, for
name:*, the "bad" approaches (unfounded transliteration, mindless
importing) versus the "good" approach (annotating foreign names
actually in use). I personally am happy with the approach clarified in
this latest email - manually annotating names that Ukranians actually
use for UK cities.

Pavlo, your original email used an overpass query to specify the
cities you planned to rename. That gave _me_ the impression you
intended to do something a bit less principled, but as long as you're
doing names-in-actual-use rather than names-for-all-cities that's
better!

Best
Dan


2014-08-05 12:00 GMT+01:00 Pavlo Dudka :
> I assert that it is "much better" to use a single service, because it is
> easier to add 100 osm-tags than implement communication with external data
> sources.
> Nominatim use osm-data, it should not(and I hope will never) use any other
> data from Wikidata or other projects.
> Mapnik allows to process .osm data without using any external data sources.
> There is also nice project "Multilingual Map" created as part of
> Multilingual maps wikipedia
> project(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_maps_wikipedia_project).
> Can any of this services be easily modified to use Wikidata? No.
>
> I don't ask anyone to waste his time to modify UK place-nodes. That's how I
> want to spend my own time. But I want to be sure that SomeoneElse_Revert or
> someone else will not revert my changes.
>
> OSM-community tries to avoid any imports. I would like to check all cities
> one by one. I will check its spelling in ukrainian spelling dictionary,
> wikipedia, web articles.
>
> Note, half of UK cities don't have any reference to Wikipedia.
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/?Q=node[%22is_in:country%22=%22United%20Kingdom%22][%22place%22=%22city%22][%22wikipedia%22!~%22.*%22];out%3B&R
> I can fill them too while adding name:uk=*.
>
>
> 2014-08-05 12:42 GMT+03:00 Andy Mabbett :
>>
>> > Not, it is not a job for external services. It is much better to use
>> > single
>> > service(OSM) rather than multiple(OSM+Wikidata).
>> > OpenStreetMap supports multiple names - let's use it. If you don't like
>> > someone use some tags - just ignore those tags.
>>
>> You assert that it is "much better"  to sue a dingle service, rather
>> than using linked open data as it is meant to be used; but you present
>> no argument for that assertion.
>>
>> It is ot a case of "not liking" some tags, but of not wanting to
>> squander vouneteer hours repeating work that has already been done -
>> effectively and better - elsewhere.
>>
>> Even were your assertion true, the data is, in many cases, already in
>> Wikidata and freely available for import.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] City names translation

[Dan S]

2014-08-05 12:23 GMT+01:00 SomeoneElse :
> On 05/08/2014 08:11, Pavlo Dudka wrote:
>>
>> I will use my own knowledge obtained on school lessons of history,
>> geography and English. Large cities are worldwide-known.
>
>
> OK...
>
>
>> I will be right saying that I can not know all cities, especially small. I
>> will search ukrainian web articles to see if there is determined translation
>> english-to-ukrainian for them.
>
>
> That's rather more problematical.  Under what licence are those web articles
> published?

The licence of the web articles is likely to be irrelevant since Pavlo
proposes to use them as a source of "mere facts" and not copyright
content. This is quite different from sourcing the data from a
structured data source, where "database rights" (different from
copyright) might prevent you from using the info. (I have UK/EU law in
mind specifically, and I'm not a lawyer, but just thought I should
mention it.)

>  How do you know that the translation is accurate, and not a poor
> transliteration (like the Bury St Edmunds example)?  How does another mapper
> verify(1) that the name is correct?

These questions are pertinent :)

Dan


> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
> (1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] UK addresses

[Dan S]

2014-08-12 23:18 GMT+01:00 Will Phillips :
> On 12/08/2014 22:46, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, Tom Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/08/14 20:18, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>>>
 Example 1

 Flat 2
 8 Something Road,
 Town,
 ...
>>>
>>> addr:flatnumber=2
>>
>> I actually have used addr:flat here before (and addr:unit for slightly
>> related things in like parades).
>>
>> cheers,
>> Derick
>
>
> I have occasionally used addr:flat when tagging the entrance to a single
> flat, but usually use addr:flats. I did use addr:flatnumber originally but
> changed to addr:flats as that seems  to have become more widely accepted.
>
> For what it's worth, there is a wiki page for addr:flats at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:flats
> The information there seems correct to me, although I might add that flat
> numbers can sometimes be letters or even names. I have tagged real examples
> like:
> addr:flats = 1-5;The Garden Flat;The Penthouse

This one is news to me. It seems a bit quirky to use "addr:flats=3" to
represent "Flat 3" but if it's used then I'll use it. Do yall use it?

(I think I've used addr:unit before, but never been sure)

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Tagging] interpolated housenumbers on single objects

[Dan S]

2014-08-20 11:11 GMT+01:00 Ilpo Järvinen :
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Will Phillips wrote:
>
>> On 20/08/2014 00:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> > > Il giorno 19/ago/2014, alle ore 23:45, Will Phillips  
>> > > ha
>> > > scritto:
>> > >
>> > > I find that by far the most time consuming part of surveying house
>> > > numbers is actually adding the data afterwards and for this reason I
>> > > think we should be trying to make the tagging quick and
>> > > straightforward for mappers wherever possible.
>> >
>> > Which editor are you using?
>>
>> I've always used JOSM.
>>
>> Speaking to other mappers, they usually agree that data input for addresses
>> takes 2-3 times as long as the actual surveying.
>
> My experience is that it takes even longer than that especially if the
> area contains small houses rather than bigger buildings. Drawing them
> all is very slow compared with inputting addr data. I'd say 10-20x.
>
>> There are various reasons for this, some specific to mapping where I
>> live (England).
>>
>> Why it takes a long time -
>> 1. The usual problems of reconciling the surveyed data with existing data and
>> the aerial imagery.
>> 2. Adding other detail at the same time. In particular, adding buildings. It
>> would be much quicker if I chose just to add nodes.
>
> So true.
>
> With the experience of tens of thousands addresses survey, this is really
> big obstable. Some of my surveyed data rotted(!) because the drawing delay
> hindered immediate input. That is, I lost the near-term memory about
> details before I could draw all the building I could easily survey
> addresses for.
>
> This is also the reason I really get almost angry when people oppose
> importing building without addresses (because they find them "useless"
> without other details such as addresses included already during the
> import). I doubt that such people have much experience on surveying
> addresses and trying to draw the buildings while inputting the addr data
> to OSM.

I agree with these observations from your experience. Back in January
I said I suspected building outlines were unimportant*. But that was
before I started heavily address-mapping! My opinion now is that a
two-step process works really well: first pass gets basic building
outlines (from aerials or maybe even from imports), then second pass
is address mapping on the ground, which will probably also include
lots of changes to the building outlines. But the first pass makes the
second pass a lot easier - both the surveying and the data entry.

Best
Dan

* http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mcld/diary/20663

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK use of highway=living_street

[Dan S]

Hi all,

By coincidence, I've just got home from mapping a "home zone"
signposted area - first time I've seen one. I'm tagging it as
living_street. Here it is:


I would say do not use the tag just because of seeing block paving on
the street. As far as I'm aware, there's no rule that motorists have
any obligation to interpret block paving in a particular way. In
practice, I guess it does influence them, but as a "nudge" not a rule,
so it seems to me that "highway=residential and surface=paving_stones"
(as you suggest, Rob) is a good fit for the merely block-paved.

Best
Dan

2014-08-31 19:56 GMT+01:00 Amaroussi-OSM :
> As far as I know for minor roads, I always default to using unclassified or 
> residential (depending on the surrounding area’s predominant land use). I 
> only use “Pedestrian” where such sign exists, and “Living streets” for actual 
> home zones with “home zone” signs, if I ever found one.
> ___
> 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] OSM on Traveline website

[Dan S]

Hi all,

Coincidentally, I'm in Sheffield this week too. Jerry said "the
traveline website" so I went to Traveline Yorkshire. But Stuart
corrected me offlist - the Yorkshire one is not using OSM data/maps
yet I think. However if I go to http://www.travelinesw.com/ I can get
OSM-powered routing... even though Sheffield isn't in the South West
;)

Dan

2014-09-15 14:59 GMT+01:00 SK53 :
> Over the weekend I made a fair bit of use of the traveline website for
> planning journeys in the Greater Manchester and Sheffield areas.
>
> Something which was relatively new to me was OSM maps appearing under the
> local map button. These show pedestrian routes between various public
> transport modes, and can be saved as PDFs (although I don't find the PDF's
> as readable as the on-line versions which use 'traditional' Mapnik style
> with a very clear overlay of bus stops and routing info).
>
> As one of my destinations was best reached by a number of different buses
> with very different routes, the provision of walking routes through parks &
> a nature reserve. In fact I wished I'd used this facility more as it would
> have meant I'd have caught an earlier bus in Sheffield: and I could have
> stored some of the PDF plans on the phone to double check exactly where the
> bus stops where situated. (I may have also been properly alerted that the
> tram network in Manchester was shut down on Saturday).
>
> All-in-all its a very useful improvement to the Traveline site, and I felt a
> great deal of satisfaction that it was OSM data delivered through a 3rd
> party site. Although I've been aware of traveline's activity with OSM, I'd
> no idea that I'd find it so useful.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Jerry
>
> ___
> 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] Updates from National Library of Scotlad

[Dan S]

Thanks!

One small but immediate benefit I found, regarding names. In East
London there's an area called Globe Town, and recently I've been
wondering how to place it, since it doesn't have much of an official
existence. Luckily, it is at least labelled on the historic OS map, so
I used it to help locate the place=* marker.


Dan

2014-10-03 23:54 GMT+01:00 Rob Nickerson :
> Hi All,
>
> NLS have been a keen contributor to OpenStreetMap and continue to provide
> historic maps for use in both OpenStreetMap and OpenHistoricMap. Their most
> recent updates include 1:1,250 scale covering central London and Edinburgh
> (1940s-60s) which include house numbers, and 1:10,560 maps for England &
> Wales (1888 to 1913).
>
> Although these maps are all historic they are still of significant benefit
> to OpenStreetMap especially in regards to public rights of way mapping (with
> survey), names of hills, streams, etc, and checking the house numbers that
> you have collected via survey.
>
> I've copied a recent email from Chris at NLS below.
>
> Regards
> Rob
>
> p.s. If you find these maps useful, please tell me how you're using them so
> I can feed this back to Chris at the NLS.
>
> ---
>
> We’ve put several thousand more maps online in the last few months – most
> notably of interest for the OSM community an ongoing project to scan and
> georeference 1940s-1960s large-scale Ordnance Survey maps of Great Britain.
>
>
>
> Our initial pilot projects have been of Edinburgh and London at 1:1,250
> scale – there are sheets and georeferenced layers available at:
> http://maps.nls.uk/os/national-grid/index.html However, we have definite
> plans to move on and georeference the greater London area, moving on
> afterwards to the south-east of England in the next few months.
>
>
>
> In Edinburgh, we have been collaborating with Eric Grosso and other OSM
> folk. Eric is using our 1950s Edinburgh layer as a way of creating a set of
> OSM historical layers for Edinburgh as part of the MESH project:
> http://www.mesh.ed.ac.uk/ This is a different approach from the NYPL
> vectoriser, but with a similar aim – essentially using good modern OSM
> content as a base for working back in time with good georeferenced
> historical mapping.
>
>
>
> In August we also put online a layer of Ordnance Survey six-inch (1:10,560)
> georeferenced mapping for England and Wales for a century ago
> http://maps.nls.uk/os/6inch-england-and-wales/index.html
>
>
>
> As you know, we are always keen for our layers to be used by the OSM
> community – I’ve added all these new layers and tile addresses to the OSM
> wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Library_of_Scotland
>
> As always too, if you think any of these new georeferenced layers would be
> of interest to others in the OSM community, I’d be very grateful if you
> could pass details on.
>
> ___
> 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] Deletions and newbie editors

[Dan S]

2014-10-05 12:11 GMT+01:00 David Woolley :
> On 05/10/14 11:27, Spike wrote:
>>
>> On 05/10/2014 10:47, David Woolley wrote:
>>>
>>> A classic example is NaPTAN stop data, where the rule for one that has
>>> gone away is to invalidate the bus stop tag and add
>>> physically_present=no, but leave the node present.  I think I've seen
>>> cases where a stop being moved has triggered an delete/add operation
>>> that has lost he NaPTAN tagging.
>>
>>
>> Could I ask please the logic behind retaining references to a stop that
>> does not exist?
>>
>> I have a local example of a stop that has not had a physical presence in
>> living memory but STILL shows on bus company maps.
>>
>
> I didn't set the rules, but I believe it is because the data is imported, so
> the existence of the data is controlled by the source of the import.
>
> Whilst the object still exists, it no longer has the the highway=bus_stop
> tag, so is not considered to be a bus stop, and should be deleted from any
> routes that it is on (very few people actually map stops on routes in the
> first place).

I don't understand why the osm object should continue to exist then.
If the bus stop ceases to exist, and the object is purely a bus-stop,
the object should be deleted, no? It doesn't make any difference that
the data was imported. (Future data-conflaters can detect naptan IDs
that vanish, just as well as they can detect naptan IDs that have
special this-has-vanished tags.)

It doesn't seem sustainable to have "special rules" for certain data
items, decided by whoever did/discussed the import, since they can't
expect the global community of OSMers to be aware of those special
rules.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors (was: Vandalism in London)

[Dan S]

That's interesting Andy, thanks

Dan

2014-10-05 23:07 GMT+01:00 SomeoneElse :
> With new editors though I sometimes think we forget how hard it is for
> someone to start editing now in e.g. the centre of London compared to when
> we "experienced mappers" started.  Here, for example (courtesy of Martijn
> Van Exel's "OSM Then and Now") is what the area I started mapping in looked
> like at around the time that I started:
>
> http://98.202.195.171/osm/16/32520/21295.png
>
> I went through at least three iterations of how the paths there should be
> tagged, committed numerous "X not joined properly to Y" sins and on at least
> one occasion managed to duplicate all the minor roads in the area.
>
> Many new mappers are just "hit and run" mappers and often it's easy to tidy
> up their contributions after they've long disappeared**. The ones who do
> stick around do need to be given a bit of time to get the hang of things -
> there are a lot of concepts to understand that really aren't obvious (the
> fact that the "map data" is more than just "the standard map style as seen
> at osm.org" is one of those).  However often a polite message helps - not a
> "you broke the map!" one, but more like "oh dear, something appears to have
> gone a bit wrong", together with an offer to assist and answer any other
> questions.
>
> As has been said earlier in previous thread, it doesn't make sense to
> restrict the ability to edit OSM data to people who understand what e.g.
> relations are.
>
> I'm certainly not the biggest fan of the way that iD does some things, but
> sometimes it seems to be being suggested that the people who wrote iD
> somehow "don't care" about OSM data quality and "if only it were more like
> JOSM" a number of these issues would go away.  The problem is that the task
> that iD sets itself is fundamentally different from the one that JOSM has.
> The quickest scan of the discussions on
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues would show that the balancing of
> "how to stop new editors from causing problems" with "how to allow new
> editors to contribute at all" is taken very seriously indeed***.
>
> I did try and do some systematic analysis to compare editors back in
> September last year
> (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-September/068178.html),
> and in that the "newbie error rate" in iD was lower than in P2 (and other
> editors including JOSM, although the numbers are a bit too low to reliably
> draw conclusions there).
>
> This isn't so much an "iD" problem as a "new mappers" one (and we don't have
> so many new mappers coming forward that we can afford to shoo them away).
> We do have ways of seeing new mappers when they start
> (http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm.php and the IRC country bot
> feeds).  We have ways of being informed about changesets in an area that
> might be problematical (WhoDidIt among others), ways to collaborate (IRC
> country channels, forums, mailing lists, etc.) and everyone has the ability
> to contact new mappers near them and offer to help.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
> ** Of course, people who delete lots of things because they think they're
> editing _their own personal copy_ of the map data need to be addressed
> immediately - but those edits are easy to spot.
>
> *** Some of what it feels like from the other end of "the iD debate" was
> written up at
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2014-September/002551.html
> (obviously read the thread and links to get the full context of that, but
> suffice to say that the reason that iD isn't perfect is because it is trying
> to solve a Very Hard Problem).
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Confused over access...

[Dan S]

2014-10-14 17:02 GMT+01:00 Stuart Reynolds :
> Hi
>
>
>
> Very quickly, if I have a road that is for bus/psv use, and is tagged like
> this:
>
>
>
> Access=no
>
> Bus=yes
>
> Psv=yes
>
>
>
> does that mean that buses are, or aren’t, allowed to use it?

Are. The more specific access rules should override the general one.

> Currently the
> bus lane around Preston Bus Station is coded this way, but my contractor
> isn’t treating it as a bus lane, and before I go and  hassle the contractor
> I thought I would check my understanding. I got the impression that
> access=no took everything out.

Maybe they didn't explicitly think through what to do when there are
multiple access tags on one object. Easily done...

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] LEZ get this completed?

[Dan S]

Hi Antje,

So you're talking about this?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/LEZ#UK

Looking at the relation we've got so far, I don't really see how we
discover the border. I imagine in practice we'll see "You are now
entering the LEZ" signs, so how do you manage to turn those into the
(dis)continuous boundary lines that we've got so far?

Thanks
Dan


2014-10-15 8:39 GMT+01:00 Antje (OpenStreetMap) :
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if someone could help me complete this LEZ thing in London? I’ve 
> only been able to add the boundaries from what I actually saw, but progress 
> is incredibly slow. If an import is necessary, it has to be ODbL-okayed.
> ___
> 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] LEZ get this completed?

[Dan S]

2014-10-15 9:17 GMT+01:00 Antje (OpenStreetMap) :
> I live in London, so I could figure out a small part of the boundary based on 
> the fact that it doesn’t go outside London for obvious reasons, and on the 
> basis of a number of past surveys and personal memory (which I call 
> leftovers).
>
> Do you think you want to change this relation to be node-based? I’m only 
> going by what the Germans do for their LEZs.


I don't have a strong opinion, just trying to understand how I would
map it if I saw it in surveying.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Dan S]

Matthijs,

Fine with me. That's a good idea, to use known brand names to make
sure you only change things that you can be confident about.

You might want to add a link on the wiki page, to this email thread.

Dan

2014-10-22 23:04 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen :
> Dear all,
>
> For all objects tagged with shop=betting and name Betfred, Coral,
> Ladbrokes, Paddy Power or William Hill, I am planning to change the
> tag shop=betting into shop=bookmaker.
>
> Please see 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Betting
> for more information.
>
> Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further
> comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I
> will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matthijs
>
> ___
> 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] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Dan S]

2014-10-23 11:16 GMT+01:00 SK53 :

> I have no particular objection to this mechanical edit. I would query
> whether it is that useful.
>

You make a good point that it's fairly easy for any non-trivial data
consumer to merge the two tags in their query. However, I'd say there are
two advantages, both for different audiences:

(1) the simplest of "simple-minded" queries are great a way in to reusing
OSM data. I did my first OSM analysis by querying for
amenity=pub. It was only later that someone pointed out it might have been
clever to try and drag in some amenity=bar as well! But the point stands.
If people can get started with using our data without having to analyse
histograms of tag combinations, that is valuable.

(2) mappers will benefit from seeing a single canonical tag used in
practice. If a mapper downloads an area and sees shop=betting, they may
remember shop=betting next time they tag, etc. I think we all soak up a lot
from seeing tagged objects in the editors.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Dan S]

Hi,

"Majestic" - if you remove "wine warehouse", is it always clear from
the other tagging which brand is meant? I imagine there may be other
shops somewhere that could be named Majestic.
Also, from a quick look at http://www.majestic.co.uk/ would it not be
better to label it "Majestic Wine"? (The company is officially
"Majestic Wine PLC" according to their interim report; their head
office contact address claims it's "Majestic Wine Warehouses Ltd").

"Co-operative" - not clear to me why you choose to drop "The" from
this one, since it's included in the branding? You choose to keep it
for "The Co-operative Food".

Best
Dan

2014-10-24 14:44 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen :
> Dear all,
>
> I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For
> details, please see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names.
>
> Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further
> comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I
> will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matthijs
>
> ___
> 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] UK Retail chains

[Dan S]

2014-10-25 17:48 GMT+01:00 ael :
>> >I have made a large update to the UK retail chain page:
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Retail_Chains
>
> I am not sure that this is on topic here, but I didn't see the Post
> Office there. Presumably it now counts now as a private business,
> although perhaps not quite "retail".
>
> Our local main office has just closed and moved to a shop within a
> shop (W H Smith in this case). A quick wiki search didn't get a hit
> on how to tag this sort of sub shop, although I know, of course, that
> this is a common situation with department stores.
>
> Is there an agreed way to tag this? Just add amenity=post_office
> to the to the same node as the shop tag? Or add a second node? Or
> something else?

Hi -

I certainly would not add it to the same node. It's only coincidence
that the tag is a different key so it lets you do that - and after all
it may have different name=*, different opening_hours=*, etc. A second
node is fine. For things like department stores (which have a big
spatial extent) it's pretty clear that the main store can be a large
way, and sub-shops can be nodes inside them.

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Retail chains

[Dan S]

2014-10-25 20:14 GMT+01:00 ael :
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 07:39:49PM +0100, Dan S wrote:
>> 2014-10-25 17:48 GMT+01:00 ael :
>> >> >I have made a large update to the UK retail chain page:
>> >> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Retail_Chains
>> >
>> > I am not sure that this is on topic here, but I didn't see the Post
>> > Office there. Presumably it now counts now as a private business,
>> > although perhaps not quite "retail".
>> >
>> > Our local main office has just closed and moved to a shop within a
>> > shop (W H Smith in this case). A quick wiki search didn't get a hit
>> > on how to tag this sort of sub shop, although I know, of course, that
>> > this is a common situation with department stores.
>> >
>> > Is there an agreed way to tag this? Just add amenity=post_office
>> > to the to the same node as the shop tag? Or add a second node? Or
>> > something else?
>>
>> Hi -
>>
>> I certainly would not add it to the same node. It's only coincidence
>> that the tag is a different key so it lets you do that - and after all
>> it may have different name=*, different opening_hours=*, etc. A second
>
> That's true. I would have noticed when I tried to do it :-)
>
> However two nodes with standard tags don't distinguish "W H Smiths
> inside Post office" from the inverse. That seems a useful distinction.
> sub_shop=yes is ugly, but perhaps something along these lines already
> exists or is needed?

This may have been discussed heavily elsewhere, I don't know. My own
opinion is that if you need something to be _inside_ something else,
there's no point trying to do that just with nodes, since areas are
perfect for the job!

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Dan S]

Hi all,

Coincidentally, I noticed this online project to maintain a list of
canonical names. It's used for auto-suggest in iD, not for
mechanical-edit:
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index

I've checked the list against Matthijs' proposal, and I've proposed a
few of his suggestions to go on their list too:
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/12/files

Best
Dan


2014-10-24 14:44 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen :
> Dear all,
>
> I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For
> details, please see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names.
>
> Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further
> comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I
> will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matthijs
>
> ___
> 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] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Dan S]

2014-11-01 12:50 GMT+00:00 Richard Fairhurst :
> Matthijs Melissen wrote:
>> Voting is now open for the proposal to unify the names of chain
>> shops within the UK by renaming them.
>
> No, it isn't.
>
> Mechanical edits stand or fall by their own merits. They cannot be ok-ed by
> a vote.
>
> From the Automated Edits Code of Conduct: "We do not require or recommend a
> formal vote, but if there is significant objection to your plan - and even
> minorities may be significant! - then change it or drop it altogether."
>
> We historically have a low tolerance of mechanical edits and imports in the
> UK; we prefer to make large-scale changes by hand. That is one of the
> reasons why the OSM map of the UK is so good. A "come one, come all" vote on
> the wiki can be trivially gerrymandered into supporting your proposals
> without any proof of approval by the people who are affected by such a bulk
> change, i.e. UK mappers.
>
> I am not sure where you got the idea of a "vote" for mechanical edits
> (Wikipedia? wiki.osm.org tag pages?), but there is no precedent for it in
> OSM and I would ask you to withdraw it.

The "rationale" part of the webpage* seems to me to set out Matthjis'
perspective on why to ask for a vote.

Also, Matthijs sent out an RFC email proposing this whole process - he
got lots of feedback (which he has taken into consideration), but
no-one objected to the voting mechanism. It's not your fault if you
only just noticed this happening, of course, but it's a little rude to
declare "No it isn't" in the sense of shutting him down when he's
proceeding in such an open and consultative manner. Lots of people
have discussed Matthijs' proposed changes in the RFC thread and now
this thread. To me, it seems a good example of consultation.

Cheers
Dan

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Dan S]

Chris, I appreciate what you're saying - except for one point:

2014-11-01 15:35 GMT+00:00 Chris Hill :
[...]
> to what is on the ground, I'll revert it and ask for Matthijs to be blocked
> from editing, as I would any other vandal.

Please can we all stop using the word "vandal" to mean "someone who
makes edits I/we disagree with"? That's very very far from what
vandalism actually is. We do have vandals in osm but please, we can
all tell the difference between vandalism and difference of opinion.
Can't we??

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Dan S]

2014-11-03 23:35 GMT+00:00 Matthijs Melissen :
> On 2 November 2014 16:11, Andy Street  wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 13:24:46 +
>> Matthijs Melissen  wrote:
>
>>> - 'Brantano Footwear' versus Brantano
>
>> Whilst company names do not necessarily reflect trading names I'd be
>> inclined to take "Brantano (UK) Limited" as further evidence for
>> "Brantano" over "Brantano Footwear".
>
> Are there still objections against "Brantano"?
>
>>> - Capitalization of Aldi, Lidl, Spar, Asda
>
>> What do people think about using upper case for names that are
>> pronounced as a series of letters and mixed case for names that are
>> pronounced as a word? Whilst not ideal (until the widespread adoption
>> of the talking shop sign!) this would give us a rule of thumb that
>> should be easy enough to follow in the majority of situations.
>
> I'm not sure if this would be a good general rule, it would look
> strange in abbreviations like NATO, AIDS, or GNU (not sure if all of
> them occur in topographic names).
>
> Maybe we could follow the spelling the organization uses themselves in
> running text? That would give us Lidl, Aldi, and Asda, but SPAR.
> Alternatively, we could follow the spelling other media use to refer
> to those shops (which is the rule Wikipedia uses), which would
> probably give us Lidl, Aldi, Asda, and Spar. The latter also
> corresponds with current use. What do you think?

I think either the running-text or the say-it-as-a-word heuristics are
roughly OK, but more importantly, they're so heuristic that what is
the point, given that the companies often don't make up their minds
entirely, and capitalisation is unlikely to be a big deal? There are
many of your suggested edits that I think will be useful, but actually
the decision whether to use "ASDA" or "Asda" is not very likely to
have any downstream impact on anyone, because even the most
simple-minded of data consumers (such as me ;) can probably do
case-insensitive search...

It might surprise everyone for me to turn against those edits! But the
capitalisation differences are so minor, I'd much rather we all agree
to let Matthijs fix the important things like "Ladbrooks" :)

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Dan S]

2014-11-04 15:20 GMT+00:00 Richard Fairhurst :
> Matthijs Melissen wrote:
>> I therefore think inviting list members to vote in order to make
>> the position of the community explicit - in addition to taking
>> comments on the mailing list into account, not as a replacement
>> of it - is the safest way to proceed.
>
> On reflection, it would be more helpful, and less controversial, if you were
> to describe this process as a "poll" rather than a "vote".
>
> A "vote" is traditionally used to move to a binding decision. A "poll" is
> seeking to gauge the level of support, often as a piece of supporting
> evidence for a wider case. In this case I hope you'll agree the latter is
> more appropriate.

Nice suggestion. One could even call it a "straw poll" which hopefully
makes it even more obvious that it isn't a binding vote?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_poll

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis Updated with latest OS Locator data

[Dan S]

2014-11-19 19:14 GMT+00:00 Dave F. :
> On 19/11/2014 09:42, Shaun McDonald wrote:
>>
>> There have been many places knocked off the 100% completeness, with 17
>> areas now below 95% complete. Overall completeness is currently 98.00%.
>
>
> Thanks for that. It's a really useful resource to check against. However...
>
> No gazette/database is ever fully accurate. Everything contains errors. So
> I'm somewhat surprised when I see an area listed as 100%. It implies users
> have blindly transferred across without checking in the real world. For
> example in my area there's a street supposedly called 'roman road' I'm born
> & bred & never heard it called that. There's no roads or building signs, the
> local authority, emergency services, or newspaper ever describe it that way.
> A couple of others are where named rows of buildings are assumed to be the
> street name, but are signed differently on the ground.
>
> Dave F.

Where OS data doesn't match OSM properly-surveyed data, we can put
OS's version in "not:name" if it's just wrong, or "alt_name" if it's
known but not the main name. Shaun's analysis can make use of these
other tags to avoid counting differences that have already been
checked. If you look at one chosen area you can see a separate column
for "not name" in Shaun's analysis - so it looks to me like they are
indeed using my not:name annotations, hoorah! Look at all these
entries which are NOT causing false positives!
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/area?name=Redbridge

Best
Dan

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

[Talk-GB] Apple trees around Cambridge

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I heard of something that will be fun for someone who likes mapping trees!

There's a project in Cambridge that is planting many apple trees, one
of each variety, in a pattern centred around the south of Cambridge.
It's said to be an art project called "Cambridge Community
Collection":
http://www.cambridgecommunitycollection.co.uk/

So, some lucky people near Cambridge have an opportunity to deploy
their advanced tree tagging skills :)

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Apple trees around Cambridge

[Dan S]

Jerry,

Yes, I bet it is difficult! If it's any consolation, apparently
they're planting the trees in alphabetical order of the variety name,
so mapping the trees will be like solving one big word-puzzle...

Dan


2014-12-07 21:41 GMT+00:00 SK53 :
> Hi Dan,
>
> I've had enough trouble with cherry trees on the north side of Cambridge:
> you really need flowers, leaves & fruit to be able to do them properly! Some
> are flowering cherries (loosely Prunus serratula, others are passable eaters
> or jam makers, so presumably cultivars of Prunus avium); and plenty are on a
> Prunus avium rootstock even if other kinds of cherry.
>
> Jerry
>
> On 7 December 2014 at 20:09, Dan S  wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I heard of something that will be fun for someone who likes mapping trees!
>>
>> There's a project in Cambridge that is planting many apple trees, one
>> of each variety, in a pattern centred around the south of Cambridge.
>> It's said to be an art project called "Cambridge Community
>> Collection":
>> http://www.cambridgecommunitycollection.co.uk/
>>
>> So, some lucky people near Cambridge have an opportunity to deploy
>> their advanced tree tagging skills :)
>>
>> Best
>> Dan
>>
>> ___
>> 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] No more voting on mechanical edits

[Dan S]

Hi Matthijs,

The DWG email used the word "consensus" inappropriately, since
consensus means everyone agreeing, and we didn't. However, consensus
is essentially impossible in big wiki communities like ours, so let's
assume there's a relative meaning of the term ;)

For the record, I still think taking an "opinion poll" of opinions is
a useful way to judge the level of community support, as long as we're
clear it isn't a binding "vote". Votes/polls can be gamed or skewed
but so can mailing-list threads (differently), and it's extremely
non-trivial to work out from a discussion thread how much
support/opposition/apathy there is.

Best
Dan


2014-12-18 1:17 GMT+00:00 Matthijs Melissen :
> Dear all,
>
> The DWG has decided not to allow votes for mechanical edits. Andy
> Townsend wrote me privately, on behalf of the Data Working Group:
>
>> Please also don't try and organise "votes" for subsequent mechanical edits -
>> the consensus of the comments on the talk-gb list is clear that it's _not_ an
>> appropriate mechanism.
>
> For the sake of transparency, I thought it would be good to share this
> message also with the list.
>
> It is not clear to me why the DWG believes that the consensus on this
> list is that voting is not an appropriate mechanism. During the
> procedure for my mechanical edits, I had the impression that while
> some members, perhaps a majority, were against voting, there were also
> members who supported the voting process, or at least thought it is
> the best process available.
>
> Personally, I also don't think this decision is particularly helpful
> for the community. For the three mechanical edit proposals I have run,
> voting has helped me a lot to gauge the amount of support within the
> community. From discussion alone it's hard to estimate if there exists
> opposition - often people ask critical questions, which might lead one
> to think they oppose the edit, but then these people still express
> support when confronted with an approve/oppose question. Also, the
> mechanical edit policy states that 'As a rule of thumb, you should
> have 90% of the community behind you when you make the edit'. It's
> unclear how someone who proposes a mechanical edit can find out what
> part of the community he has behind him, when polling the community is
> not permitted.
>
> In any case, the citation above is the decision of the DWG. I respect
> this decision, and I will therefore not use voting as a means to gauge
> the community's opinion in further mechanical edit proposals.
>
> Finally, I would like to thank Andy and the rest of the DWG for their
> hard work. Even though I don't agree with their decision in this
> particular instance, I realize they do a lot of unpaid hard work that
> is invaluable for the community.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matthijs
>
> ___
> 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] RFC-3 Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Dan S]

2014-12-18 10:39 GMT+00:00 SomeoneElse :
> On 18/12/2014 02:10, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
>>
>> If you oppose this proposal, or if you want to register particular
>> areas or objects for an opt-out, please edit the wiki page under the
>> section 'Oppositions and opt-out'.
>
>
> At the risk of restating the obvious,
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy must still be
> followed, including the bit where it says "You must not go ahead with your
> plans if there is noticeable opposition".
>
> So this particular proposal is not "opt out".  If there is "noticeable
> opposition", then it shouldn't go ahead.

Andy,

The Mechanical Edit Policy, which you just linked us to, quite clearly
says Matthijs must provide "Information on how to "opt out"". It says
it in two places. So I think Matthijs is doing the right thing here -
if he did NOT provide opt-out information, he would be violating the
policy!

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] No more voting on mechanical edits

[Dan S]

2014-12-18 12:19 GMT+00:00 SomeoneElse :
> On 18/12/2014 10:24, Dan S wrote:
>>
>> Hi Matthijs,
>>
>> The DWG email used the word "consensus" inappropriately, since
>> consensus means everyone agreeing, and we didn't. However, consensus
>> is essentially impossible in big wiki communities like ours, so let's
>> assume there's a relative meaning of the term ;)
>
> Maybe I've been using the word inappropriately all these years but I've
> always thought that "concensus" meant "general agreement" - the idea that
> "we, as a community, generally think this" not that "absolutely everyone
> agrees with every part of something 100%".  It doesn't mean "10 people who
> could be bothered ticked a box on a wiki page".  It means, "we, as a
> community, have thought about it, discussed it, and although some people may
> disagree, the general feeling of the community is X".

I see - in my understanding "consensus" is, at least formally, a
stronger term than "general agreement" - "nem con" is perhaps a good
equivalent, meaning that no-one disagreed (although some may have
abstained). I do recognise it's not always always used that way.

> My DWG mail to Matthijs (part of which was selectively quoted to this list)
> contained a number of suggestions about how to best to proceed.  These
> included better explaining why a change now rather than later was
> beneficial, and why some of the other suggestions raised last time wouldn't
> work for the problem as he sees it. It also covered the issue of how to
> ensure that new mappers use the "correct" tags.  Thinking about these other
> issues is actually far more important than whether or not to do X mechanical
> edit.

Well I'm sorry for intervening in half a conversation. I was motivated
by my perception that someone somewhere had a mistaken impression of
unanimity!

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] import / mech edit of some Aberdeen city council open data

[Dan S]

Hi Jo,

How do you know it's OGL licensed? I went to try and find the licence
and I found this page:
http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/open_data/education_learning.asp
where the licence is stated to be CC-BY-SA-3, which cannot be imported
into OSM (because the SA constraint means it can't be relicensed as
ODBL). I can't be certain that I found the "same" schools data (...in
fact it has 72 vs 70 items in it...), but I guess at some point the
imports-list would demand proper proof that it's available under a
compatible licence. They'd also ask how the lat/lon were found (did it
involve OS? google?), since that's been an issue with some imports.

From my point of view, this is a simple and small dataset and I
personally would not object to an import as long as duplicates were
avoided etc. Others probably feel different. It's mainly the licence
question for me. Oh and I don't live anywhere near Aberdeen ;)

Best
Dan

2015-02-07 17:24 GMT+00:00 Jo Walsh :
> I'm here at http://codethecity.org and neiljp has just arrived, too, and
> we are egging one another on to import some Aberdeen city council open
> data into OSM.
>
> Specifically looking at this dataset of schools with point locations:
>
> http://open311.xoverto.com/dev/v1/facilities/schools.json
>
> An overpass query reveals a mix of node and way data for schools
> existing, with nothing like the same coverage.
>
> Would people be broadly okay with this / should we be following a
> process through the list?
>
> The data is OGL licensed.
>
>
> zx
>
> --
>   Jo Walsh
>   metaz...@fastmail.net
>
> ___
> 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] "Scenic or not?"

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I just saw an announcement that mySociety will be mothballing some of
their old projects. One of them is "Scenic or not?" - it's a project
to gather "a freely available nation-wide dataset of scenicness" for
the UK.
http://scenic.mysociety.org/

So, well I never heard about it until now, but now it's shutting down,
or at least going into read-only mode. Why do I mention it?

* It provides open crowdsourced data about scenicness (ODBL licence) -
hundreds of thousands of votes cast. Surely one of you might do
something interesting with it?
* "Would you like to run ScenicOrNot yourself?" asks the website.
Maybe you would...?

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road Names Quarterly Project

[Dan S]

2015-02-17 11:46 GMT+00:00 Colin Smale :
> A better paradigm is that the data should be "independently verifiable from
> open sources."  If the sign is wrong, it is wrong. Propagating that error
> does not change that by magical thinking.

It is true that street signs can be wrong, but other "official" data
is wrong with roughly the same frequency. There is no absolute truth
that we can appeal to. So we need a community standard for which
sources of evidence we use for OSM, and that is broadly agreed to
prefer things observable on the ground. This does not rule out the use
of common sense!

> "Ground truth" is of course no good if there is nothing on the ground - such
> as boundary lines, postcodes and even "source=local_knowledge". If there is
> no sign at all, should we remove the name from OSM, even though we, the
> local authority and Royal Mail agree that it has a certain name?

This is a straw man argument, so let's skip over it.

> This "ground truth" business needs a bit of nuance now and then. It's not
> black and white - in between there are many shades of grey, where
> common sense needs to be factored in.

Common sense, yes of course, no-one said otherwise. I used to find it
odd that OSM preferred "ground truth" over official data, but I've
increasingly come to see the wisdom of this. "Ground truth" however
does not mean purely "street signs" - it's a common-sense combination
of evidence, where we give most credit to the evidence that is freely
accessible at the location (e.g. street signs, talking to people,
looking at bus stops...). This is different from Wikipedia's
consensus, which prefers official sources rather than direct
experience - a really interesting contrast IMHO!

Best
Dan


> On 2015-02-17 11:48, Jonathan Harley wrote:
>
> On 17/02/15 10:03, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> It's only "correct" because that's the frame of reference you have chosen in
> this case. The local authority decides what a street is officially called.
> How that is transposed to signs sometimes introduces errors, and these
> errors are sometimes volatile. The OS is not the source of the official name
> either is it?
>
> The frame of reference we use is "ground truth" - what is actually there in
> the physical world.
>
> Also, the signage at the end of the street is what visitors and delivery
> drivers see, so it's surely the most practically useful thing to have on a
> map.
>
>
> J.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Search but cannot find

[Dan S]

2015-03-18 15:54 GMT+00:00  :
>
>
> On Wed Mar 18 15:38:13 2015 GMT, Pmailkeey . wrote:
>> >
>> U-numbers are used publicly - most often on temporary planning development
>> notices attached to street lights etc.
>>
> If they are not signed, then they do not belong in the ref tag.
>
> The consensus is that such information belongs in an admin_ref tag, a sat nav 
> instruction to 'turn left into the U666' is very unhelpful.

Can you point us to some further reading about this "admin_ref" tag?
The wiki isn't telling me about it. If there is indeed a consensus
then it'd be nice for it to be documented!

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: Search but cannot find

[Dan S]

2015-03-19 1:54 GMT+00:00 Pmailkeey . :
>
> On 18 March 2015 at 17:54, Ed Loach  wrote:
>>
>> Dan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Can you point us to some further reading about this "admin_ref"
>>
>> > tag?
>>
>> > The wiki isn't telling me about it. If there is indeed a consensus
>>
>> > then it'd be nice for it to be documented!
>>
>>
>>
>> A wiki search for admin_ref finds
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines#Tagging_Road_Numbers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> There's a right way to tag road numbers and a wrong way. The above is the
> wrong way.

Thanks but this is a bit unhelpful - could you explain what you mean please?

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] weeklyOSM 243 now in English

[Dan S]

2015-03-22 15:54 GMT+00:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 21 March 2015 at 21:18, Manfred A. Reiter  wrote:
>
>> The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 243, is now available online in
>> English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the
>> openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu
>
> This is an excellent serve, thank you.
>
> Might I suggest compiling and archiving, it on the OSM Wiki? We could
> then use a script to distribute it to the talk pages of interested
> mappers.

It is a really nice service. But I'm puzzled why you'd want it on the
wiki? I can't think of an advantage, so there must be something I've
missed. The weekly already provides RSS feeds in multiple languages
(wow, great!) as well as email subscription, so it's easy for
interested people to keep track of it. Plus the weekly website has a
nice web design to suit its purpose.

> and of course the scripts used should be open source.

Usually, it's for the author of the script to decide if the script is
open source.

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] GB postcodes

[Dan S]

2015-03-25 18:20 GMT+00:00 Pmailkeey . :
>
>
> On 25 March 2015 at 17:55, Steve Doerr  wrote:
>>
>> Surely the Royal Mail copyright precludes us from using these datasets?
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On 25/03/2015 17:43, Mick Orridge wrote:
>>>
>>> On the subject of postcodes, I have generated approximate regions from
>>> the ONS postcode data for postcode areas, districts and sectors which can be
>>> downloaded as shp files here:-
>>
>
> What do we want them for anyway? OSM seems to collect junk. Post box ref
> numbers and collection times are prime examples.

That's a bit rude.

Postcodes are very valuable for routing - people outside OSM use them
very heavily for that. Postcodes are not even a minority concern.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road works

[Dan S]

Hi,

This is really more an issue for the "tagging" mailing list rather
than "talk-gb", I guess. Anyway I think people already use
construction tags for the purposes you have in mind. This wiki page
describes how to use (including a tag for estimated finish date):
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction

Best
Dan


2015-04-01 20:51 GMT+01:00 pmailkeey . :
> Hi all,
>
> I think we need road works features for the map - with restrictions as to
> their use:
>
> Only for closures - where rerouting is necessary
> Only for works affecting more than 1 day (as otherwise not really worth the
> effort to put on)
> Not generally for use re closures re accidents and incidents (but only due
> to short time effects).
>
> Ideal for cases where the bridge has washed away in the floods etc. and
> repairs will take months.
>
> Can we please discuss and wikify ?
>
> Examples:
>
> Proposed road works:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/335977956#map=19/54.46572/-3.55080
>
> Existing road works: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/335558485
>
> Possible Issues:
>
> Naming - 'road works' is clearly not enough. adding a finishing date code
> would enable anyone to find finished works to reinstate the road (provided
> works don't go over time)
> by area ?
> maintenance of data?
>
>
> Ok, that's some outline ideas... discuss !
>
>
> --
> Mike.
> @millomweb - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
> via the area's premier website -
>
> currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property &
> pets
>
> T&Cs
>
> ___
> 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] Road works

[Dan S]

2015-04-02 0:43 GMT+01:00 pmailkeey . :
>
>
> On 1 April 2015 at 20:59, Dan S  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is really more an issue for the "tagging" mailing list rather
>> than "talk-gb", I guess. Anyway I think people already use
>> construction tags for the purposes you have in mind. This wiki page
>> describes how to use (including a tag for estimated finish date):
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction
>>
>> Best
>> Dan
>
>
> Thanks for the pointer Dan but I see
>
>  "As OSM data is often used offline (and therefore may be several months
> old), only tag construction sites (particularly roads and railroads) if they
> are planned to be closed for at least six to nine months. Don't use
> construction=* to tag short-term closures (e.g. a road closed over a weekend
> to replace a sewer pipe); consider using conditional restrictions instead."
>
> Which basically equates to "The fact some people use out of date data, we
> all should."
>
> It's this kind of 'logic' that really does point to the failings of those
> implementing the OSM project.

This is (again) rather rude. You need to understand, firstly, that OSM
is crowdsourced in its rules as well as its data. "Those implementing"
the OSM project means everyone here. There are no mysterious bungling
overlords, just the hive mind! If you want to change OSM's culture,
you should try a strategy so that people don't simply mute your
emails.

I personally am happy to tag construction that is relatively brief,
but the guideline that you quote has come out of lots of discussion.
Also remember that the wiki is not "the rules" - it often represents
consensus but should often be taken with a pinch of salt. So I don't
follow exactly the info that you quote! That's why, in my personal
opinion, that tag is exactly what you're searching for.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Postbox refs

[Dan S]

2015-04-03 19:01 GMT+01:00 John Aldridge :
> On 03/04/2015 18:49, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've noticed recently that postbox references have started appearing
>> with a "D" on the end (same ref as before just with a D added to the
>> end). This seems to be in areas where RM have updated the collection
>> times.
>>
>> Does anyone know what the D means?
>
>
> I'm not certain, but the ones I've noticed round here seem to be those with
> latest collection times very early in the day (Perhaps done along with the
> delivery round, rather than a separate collection round? That's conjecture,
> though).

I hope RobW doesn't mind me quoting an email he sent me recently while
we were discussing this:

"""
A bit more investigation, and asking someone who's in the know,
suggests that these suffixes correspond to boxes that are being
emptied by postmen on the rounds, and so have earlier collection times
than normal. Royal Mail made this change for boxes with low volumes of
mail where there's another box nearby with later collection times. I
believe that the base box number will be unchanged, so it's just a
case of a D being added to the end.

I've written a bit about this at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=post_box#Locating_postboxes_in_the_UK

I've also updated my tools, so they'll ignore a "D" suffix if present
-- and so any D boxes will still match the original number that's on
Royal Mail's records.
"""

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Police Scotland

[Dan S]

Hurrah :)

So is Shaun the Sheep
http://shauninthecity.org.uk/Shaun_In_The_City_Trail_Map.pdf

Dan


2015-04-07 9:31 GMT+01:00 Bob Kerr :
> Police Scotland are using our map
>
> http://www.scotland.police.uk/your-community/edinburgh/
>
> Cheers
>
> Bob
>
> ___
> 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] Labelling a greasy spoon caff

[Dan S]

Hi all,

Any thoughts about tagging a greasy spoon cafe (a caff)? It's a
particular British type of food that we need to be able to locate
accurately ;)

In taginfo I see
  cuisine=breakfast (282)
  cuisine=british (73)
but both seem too vague to me. There are a handful of
  cuisine=greasy_spoon (4)
so I'll go with that unless there's anything better I've missed.

Also I've just learnt that the term "greasy spoon" is of US origin!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greasy_spoon

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Labelling a greasy spoon caff

[Dan S]

2015-04-24 20:22 GMT+01:00 Lester Caine :
> On 24/04/15 20:13, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>> Greasy spoon truck stops (or any mobile "food truck" on a schedule)
>> could be:
>>
>>  transient:amenity=restaurant
>>  cuisine=greasy_spoon;british
>>  operating_hours=Sa 16:00-20:00
>>  name=Greasy Spooning Cafe
>>  website=http://foodtrucksrus.net/o=92
>>
>> So it won't render confusingly with permanently located features.
>
> Mobile catering is NOT the sort of greasy_spoon we are talking about.
> These are sit down cafes serving mainly a full English greasy breakfast.

Yep, my question was not about transient/mobile catering - but then I
think Bryce was just responding to Jerry on that point, I don't think
he was misunderstanding.

It's about a specific style of cuisine / eatery, and actually most of
the ones I've been to in my life haven't been on transport routes,
just sit-down cafes in non-posh parts of town. The one I was in this
morning was a caff in mid-London, full of building workers ordering
extremely large fried breakfasts.

I'm not keen on cuisine=breakfast because (a) it's not just any
breakfast, it's a very specific type of breakfast; (b) these places
usually serve lunch as well, and maybe even tea! I guess I might end
up going with cuisine=greasy_spoon - but since there were only 4 uses
so far, I suspected there was something I was missing. Also it felt a
bit too colloquial, but then it's pretty much the only word I have for
that style of cuisine.

Best
Dan

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

[Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I don't relish bringing this up since it's a bit of a tangle, but I
noticed Cambridge has a lot more universities than I thought!
Apparently 1219, judging from the number of amenity=university tagged
objects. In real life I'm aware of two: Cambridge Uni, Anglia Ruskin
Uni.

I think someone mentioned Cambridge Uni was using OpenStreetMap for
some of its maps,* so I'd be nervous about proposing anything radical
right now. But is there anyone on this list who is a Cambridge mapper,
or connected to the university's use of mapping? It's possible that
some team decided to use the tag to mark every college building (etc),
when really amenity=university is supposed to mark a university, not a
piece of a university.

To do it "properly" it might need some neat relations to group these
things. (Might be fun for someone who loves relations - various
multi-site and hierarchical connections among the buildings scattered
across town!) Alternatively there are tags in use such as
building=university which might be good drop-in replacements...

Best
Dan


* They use OSM for their basemap: http://map.cam.ac.uk/ - I wonder if
they're getting their POI info from it too

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

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

; university, the rest is in Chelmsford. I don't think it would do any harm
> and would be helpful to group them with relations, if that were maintainable
> sustainably, but not at the expense of losing the tags from the outline
> itself. And the building thing only extends this further. Is a University a
> geographical thing at all? It's an institution, which may have some
> buildings but really it's a concept not a physical object - ultimately
> everything on the map is just a part, not the whole.
>
> 4. Constantly changing tags creates a moving target that is extremely hard
> to maintain for data consumers, and is a major off-putting factor in using
> OSM, especially if you can't manage the process because things just change
> under your feet. For example, there is a thread on talk discussing
> completely changing the amenities altogether, without regard for people who
> want to use this stuff in the real world. My view is that tags are merely
> tokens and too much is read into the words. They are part of the API and the
> fact you can change them because you prefer some other structure doesn't
> mean you should. The flexibility means we can introduce new things easily,
> but constant change is hard to cope with. The costs are borne elsewhere, and
> what really does it buy us?
>
> So, I think it's OK the way it is. If it offends you unbearably,
> building=university wouldn't be too hard to cope with, but please, please
> don't just do it, let me change the University software first, otherwise the
> map will be broken on next update (which are frequent) and they will be very
> annoyed. As I said, this is effectively part of the API, even though it may
> not feel like it, and constitutes a non-upward compatible change. If you do
> want to do it, please do it all, not in bits, and bear in mind this has a
> direct financial cost to me as a freelancer supporting the University map,
> and that the University has been a big benefactor for OSM, even though they
> get the rest of the map back in return, so you really don't want to give
> them a slap in the face for doing so.
>
> David
>
>
> On Thu, 21 May 2015 at 23:13 Phillip Barnett 
> wrote:
>>
>> I'm a Cambridge mapper, but I'd advise doing nothing until you've spoken
>> with David Earl who was contracted by Cambridge University to actually map
>> the university - see this link
>> http://soc2012.soc.org.uk/node/16.html
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 21 May 2015, at 22:39, Dan S  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I don't relish bringing this up since it's a bit of a tangle, but I
>> > noticed Cambridge has a lot more universities than I thought!
>> > Apparently 1219, judging from the number of amenity=university tagged
>> > objects. In real life I'm aware of two: Cambridge Uni, Anglia Ruskin
>> > Uni.
>> >
>> > I think someone mentioned Cambridge Uni was using OpenStreetMap for
>> > some of its maps,* so I'd be nervous about proposing anything radical
>> > right now. But is there anyone on this list who is a Cambridge mapper,
>> > or connected to the university's use of mapping? It's possible that
>> > some team decided to use the tag to mark every college building (etc),
>> > when really amenity=university is supposed to mark a university, not a
>> > piece of a university.
>> >
>> > To do it "properly" it might need some neat relations to group these
>> > things. (Might be fun for someone who loves relations - various
>> > multi-site and hierarchical connections among the buildings scattered
>> > across town!) Alternatively there are tags in use such as
>> > building=university which might be good drop-in replacements...
>> >
>> > Best
>> > Dan
>> >
>> >
>> > * They use OSM for their basemap: http://map.cam.ac.uk/ - I wonder if
>> > they're getting their POI info from it too
>> >
>> > ___
>> > 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] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

I don't think it renders it (though I thought it used to).

The humanitarian style renders the tag, and Cambridge looks mortar-board crazy:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/52.2039/0.1182&layers=H

Dan


2015-05-22 12:30 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
> Does the main OSM rendering understand building=university?
>
>
> On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:27 Dan S  wrote:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> Thanks for the detailed info. My main concern is in terms of the
>> consequences for other data consumers. If someone tries to use OSM
>> data for anything - such as:
>>  (a) to plot the density of universities per county
>>  (b) to render a map using a UK-wide rendering scheme that indicates
>> each university prominently
>> - the results will be utterly wrong. So we do need some consistency,
>> at least at the country-wide level. (I'm pragmatic enough not to aim
>> for global consistency ;)
>>
>> So I'm not offended, but I do care that our data is good for everyone.
>> I suggest that we should make a change but I will not rush anything!
>>
>> I don't know what this "camp" is that didn't like building=university.
>> Was it an OSM camp (eg a discussion on the tagging email list)? Either
>> way, building=university is now used quite a lot worldwide
>> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=university#map - I
>> think it's pretty uncontroversial as a building tag.
>>
>> So the question, I guess, is what "jobs" amenity=university is doing
>> in your scheme. Is it being used as a selector for extracting data? Is
>> it being used as a selector for rendering-rules? You've got your
>> operator=* tagging which looks good for selecting a data extract.
>>
>> If we made a two-step change such that all "building=yes,
>> amenity=university, operator=.*University of Cambridge.*" were first
>> modified to building=university, and then after a few months to remove
>> the amenity=university from buildings and leave it on
>> sites/universities/whatever-we-agree-it-should-be-on - would that work
>> for you? My quick overpass check suggests that would address about 800
>> of the 1200 objects.
>>
>> Best
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> 2015-05-22 11:54 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
>> > Hi Dan,
>> >
>> > Yes, Philip's right - I developed and continue to maintain the
>> > University
>> > map at http://map.cam.ac.uk (as well as doing all of the original street
>> > pattern mapping for Cambridge back in 2006). The University has put a
>> > considerable investment and negotiated permission for college access
>> > into
>> > the map and contributed tens of thousands of pounds of survey data into
>> > OSM
>> > - it's not just "some of its maps", it's completely central to the
>> > University map, not just a casual effort.
>> >
>> > The "schema" for tags that make the University map work is at
>> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cambridge/University_of_Cambridge
>> > (I've
>> > just realised I haven't updated that page with a recent, unrelated new
>> > bit,
>> > I must do so).
>> >
>> > As it happens, I was also thinking about this the other day. The three
>> > main
>> > things are that is (a) consistent and (b) doesn't change under our feet
>> > and
>> > break the map, (c) it needs a way to distinguish these buildings from
>> > others. It possibly wasn't the best decision to do it like this, though
>> > I
>> > still don't think it is a terrible way to do it. Relations would be
>> > awful:
>> > they are very hard to maintain accurately, and incidentally they are
>> > hard to
>> > work with in consumers because they come at the end of the data so you
>> > have
>> > to do multiple passes or keep lots of data in memory, and I think you'd
>> > lose
>> > most of the distinctive renderings off the OSM map, though since that's
>> > such
>> > an opaque process it's hard to know.
>> >
>> > building=university would work, but only if done in a controlled way so
>> > that
>> > we don't break the map while it's being done. But do you really want to
>> > spend your days in front of a computer changing all the university tags
>> > in
>> > Cambridge though?! I can think of more productive and helpful things to
>> > do.
>> > I did consider building=university, but like al

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

2015-05-22 12:33 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
>> to render a map using a UK-wide rendering scheme that indicates
>> each university prominently
>
> What *would* you show for Cambridge (or other spread out ones) for this?
> Where actually *is* the University of Cambridge? What would you show that
> the current tagging doesn't already achieve?

It doesn't matter what I would do. The UoC tagging is inconsistent
with the tagging for other universities, in a way that means no-one
can currently design a UK-wide map render that can handle universities
properly.

I understand that you don't like this erupting under your feet, but
I'm afraid that's what happens in wiki-like systems. Please, please be
happy that I'm a considerate map editor who tries to discuss rather
than just to edit. We have absolutely no guarantees that a map editor
who loves consistency but doesn't love communication will not break
your schema at any moment!

I'd be really grateful if you could comment on my suggestion about
modifying the building tags.

Best
Dan


> On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:30 David Earl  wrote:
>>
>> Does the main OSM rendering understand building=university?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:27 Dan S  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the detailed info. My main concern is in terms of the
>>> consequences for other data consumers. If someone tries to use OSM
>>> data for anything - such as:
>>>  (a) to plot the density of universities per county
>>>  (b) to render a map using a UK-wide rendering scheme that indicates
>>> each university prominently
>>> - the results will be utterly wrong. So we do need some consistency,
>>> at least at the country-wide level. (I'm pragmatic enough not to aim
>>> for global consistency ;)
>>>
>>> So I'm not offended, but I do care that our data is good for everyone.
>>> I suggest that we should make a change but I will not rush anything!
>>>
>>> I don't know what this "camp" is that didn't like building=university.
>>> Was it an OSM camp (eg a discussion on the tagging email list)? Either
>>> way, building=university is now used quite a lot worldwide
>>> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=university#map - I
>>> think it's pretty uncontroversial as a building tag.
>>>
>>> So the question, I guess, is what "jobs" amenity=university is doing
>>> in your scheme. Is it being used as a selector for extracting data? Is
>>> it being used as a selector for rendering-rules? You've got your
>>> operator=* tagging which looks good for selecting a data extract.
>>>
>>> If we made a two-step change such that all "building=yes,
>>> amenity=university, operator=.*University of Cambridge.*" were first
>>> modified to building=university, and then after a few months to remove
>>> the amenity=university from buildings and leave it on
>>> sites/universities/whatever-we-agree-it-should-be-on - would that work
>>> for you? My quick overpass check suggests that would address about 800
>>> of the 1200 objects.
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-05-22 11:54 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
>>> > Hi Dan,
>>> >
>>> > Yes, Philip's right - I developed and continue to maintain the
>>> > University
>>> > map at http://map.cam.ac.uk (as well as doing all of the original
>>> > street
>>> > pattern mapping for Cambridge back in 2006). The University has put a
>>> > considerable investment and negotiated permission for college access
>>> > into
>>> > the map and contributed tens of thousands of pounds of survey data into
>>> > OSM
>>> > - it's not just "some of its maps", it's completely central to the
>>> > University map, not just a casual effort.
>>> >
>>> > The "schema" for tags that make the University map work is at
>>> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cambridge/University_of_Cambridge
>>> > (I've
>>> > just realised I haven't updated that page with a recent, unrelated new
>>> > bit,
>>> > I must do so).
>>> >
>>> > As it happens, I was also thinking about this the other day. The three
>>> > main
>>> > things are that is (a) consistent and (b) doesn't change under our feet
>>> > and
>>> > break the map, (c) it needs a way to distinguish the

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

Right, OK thanks. So let me try and answer without raising any
sub-controversies - that's why I was reluctant to answer "what would
you show for cambridge"!

If there was a single mortar-board for every geographically
self-contained UoC "site" on the map - that seems rather reasonable.
The minimalist way to achieve that would be for those sites to have
amenity=university tag, and for none of the buildings within them to
have that tag. (The humanitarian map would then look good...) I
personally would find that still a little bit curious but here I'm not
proposing to impose my ideal relation-tastic solution, since you've
raised some objections to that kind of thing.

For university buildings that are standalone, not part of a larger
"site" - well I guess if I had to design a map I wouldn't put any
mortar-board for them, though I might decide to give them a
mortar-board at the highest zoom level. (This might be achieved via
building=university perhaps. Though the question is about the
rendering not the tagging.)

Is this a meaningful answer to your rendering question? I hope so.

Best
Dan


2015-05-22 13:03 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
> Sorry, that wasn't intended to be provocative, it was a serious question.
> Irrespective of how it is tagged, how should one show a spread out
> institution on a map? If you do ARU with two mortar boards or some such
> should Cambridge be 10, one for each site, 41 including the colleges, or
> what? One could argue that it's the mapping you cited that's inadequate
> because it should collapse them into one when they are sufficiently close
> together to not be distinct (like ios does for photo locations on a map for
> example*), and that when zoomed in you *do* want them to be shown
> separately. In any case neither the current scheme nor a relation scheme
> preclude that, they are currently group-able by operator (which is a much
> more sustainable way of relating them IMO than relations).
>
> I asked about the building=university rendering because it would be a shame
> to lose the university buildings as distinct on the main map, and I have no
> control over fixing that. No doubt someone would catch up with it
> eventually.
>
> I would have to go back to the code to see what the exact implications of
> removing the amenity tags are, it's three years since I wrote it. I am
> almost certain that changing building=yes to building=university is
> harmless, but if I then have to rely on it, we have to be careful that
> university libraries aren't tagged building=library for example as the
> information gets lost.
>
> David
>
> * in similar vein one of the developments that's been requested for the
> university map is that when you get a search hit where the result blobs are
> overlapping they should be merged into one. This is very hard to do, so it
> will cost a lot.
>
>
> On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:40 Dan S  wrote:
>>
>> 2015-05-22 12:33 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
>> >> to render a map using a UK-wide rendering scheme that indicates
>> >> each university prominently
>> >
>> > What *would* you show for Cambridge (or other spread out ones) for this?
>> > Where actually *is* the University of Cambridge? What would you show
>> > that
>> > the current tagging doesn't already achieve?
>>
>> It doesn't matter what I would do. The UoC tagging is inconsistent
>> with the tagging for other universities, in a way that means no-one
>> can currently design a UK-wide map render that can handle universities
>> properly.
>>
>> I understand that you don't like this erupting under your feet, but
>> I'm afraid that's what happens in wiki-like systems. Please, please be
>> happy that I'm a considerate map editor who tries to discuss rather
>> than just to edit. We have absolutely no guarantees that a map editor
>> who loves consistency but doesn't love communication will not break
>> your schema at any moment!
>>
>> I'd be really grateful if you could comment on my suggestion about
>> modifying the building tags.
>>
>> Best
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> > On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:30 David Earl 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Does the main OSM rendering understand building=university?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:27 Dan S  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi David,
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for the detailed info. My main concern is in terms of the
>> >>> consequences for other data consumers. If someone tries to use OSM
>> >>> data for anything - 

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

2015-05-22 14:03 GMT+01:00 SK53 :
> For what it is worth, the universities in Nottingham are mapped exactly the
> same way as Cambridge

It doesn't look like that to me. A query on Nottingham finds 16
objects tagged amenity=university, of which 4 are buildings. It looks
to me like Nottingham broadly uses amenity=university at "site level"
rather than "building level" (with some exceptions).

> Finally, my general view is that the only sensible tag for consolidating
> separate campuses is to add an operator=* tag. We could do with some
> agreement about how to label campuses. Do we use "University of Nottingham
> Jubilee Campus" or "Jubilee Campus" etc. And of course some checking on the
> use of the operator tag itself.

Sounds good.

> PS. The use of an icon on the HOT map layer doesn't work for me in 1st world
> countries: but I dont regard that as terribly important, surely the HOT
> layer needs to be directed at places which most need the rendering scheme
> chosen

Oh, absolutely. Sorry for being unclear there: the HOT rendering is
just a real-life example of the rendering problem I wanted to
illustrate.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

2015-05-22 14:49 GMT+01:00 Andy Allan :
> On 22 May 2015 at 14:27, David Earl  wrote:
>> Andy, the operator tags are all the same, not the building names.
>
> No, they really aren't.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148247775 - "Churchill College
> (University of Cambridge)"
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12861651 - "University of Cambridge"
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/98523431 - "Clare College (University
> of Cambridge)"

but David's using a constrained and documented set of operator tags,
not free-text. I think that's good. The oxbridge college system makes
this a difficult case study! I think the operator tags here are
appropriate.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

[Dan S]

2015-05-23 12:49 GMT+01:00 David Earl :
> On Sat, 23 May 2015 at 12:43 Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>>
>> On 22 May 2015 at 14:58, David Earl  wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, the operator tags are the same when it is the same institution -
>> > the
>> > colleges are independent institutions, part of the larger federation.
>>
>> Is it necessary to show the college <=> university relationship in
>> OSM? If we tag one (set of) structures as "King's College", and
>> another as "Peterhouse", won't that suffice?
>
> I'm sure there are many ways of doing this, but that is what I did.

In my opinion: no it wouldn't suffice, because it doesn't identify the
operator among all the other King's Colleges in the country. IMHO it's
not encoding a relationship into the tag, it's just an unambiguous
name. Anyway it's harmless!


> This thread seems determined to undermine the University of Cambridge map by
> wanting to change everything it relies on.

Well no, clearly no-one's doing this with an intent to destroy the
university map! I assume everyone here just wants to make sure OSM is
good.


> I did spend a long time thinking
> about how to do it at the beginning of the project, and did publish the
> details then. Reorganising it dramatically four years on for the sake of it
> would probably mean U of C abandoning OSM as being too costly to maintain.

Sorry, I guess this happens. But this kind of discussion is necessary
for us as a local community - otherwise we'll never really share
information about how we tag universities, hospitals etc. As long as
we keep it from getting sidetracked, and assume good faith, we'll be
OK. I know you would have liked all the discussion to be done and
dusted during your planning stages, I'm sorry I wasn't around for it.

Best
Dan

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

[Talk-GB] England LIDAR data to be OGL in September

[Dan S]

Hi all,

Just passing this on - the Environment Agency's LIDAR mapping of much
of England is going to be opened up in September, under the Open
Government Licence:
https://environmentagency.blog.gov.uk/2015/06/16/free-mapping-data-will-elevate-flood-risk-knowledge/

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct

[Dan S]

> Andy Townsend wrote:
> > (6) 
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse/Your_tiles_from_osm.org

Interesting hack Andy, thanks


2015-07-14 6:18 GMT+01:00 Richard Fairhurst :
>> Unfortunately I suspect what I'd choose works well for a
>> certain type of countryside, but less well for town centres [...]
>> so I suspect that we'd soon hit the same sort of issues as
>> the standard style has
>
> You can fairly easily adapt rendering rules for rural areas vs towns. See
> for example http://cycle.travel/map?lat=51.791&lon=-1.5087&zoom=13 : pubs
> aren't shown in towns at z13 (Witney), but are in villages (Minster Lovell,
> Ducklington). At z16 they're shown in towns but not cities.
>
> It doesn't play nicely with minutely updates, but would we need that for a
> UK map? I'd have thought a daily reimport - very feasible on a UK-sized
> extract - would be enough.

Sounds good. Mind if I ask how it is done? (i.e. rendering rules for
rural vs town) - is it simply two different stylesheets, plus a list
of specified boundaries, or something responsive to POI density,
or...? If there's a blurb online somewhere that gives a hint I'd be
interested.

(Sorry if I'm taking this off-topic, not sure.)

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I'm so fed up of the carping over the default map render (OSM-Carto).
It's clearly a "contested resource" for our community. Was there ever
much discussion about creating transparent overlays (e.g. a hiking
overlay) on top of a minimal baselayer, so that we can "disaggregate"
the thing and make it less of a focus for squabbles? I don't remember
seeing discussion of overlays, but it would seem a good way for
everyone to access as many or as few features as they wanted.

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Last quarterly project for 2015

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I might be able to help with Lea Valley - especially the central
London end of it. I've been mostly too busy for OSM this year, but
should try and get to some of the NRs...

Best
Dan


2015-10-05 10:43 GMT+01:00 SK53 :
> Hi Steve,
>
> The local hotspot around you is the Lea Valley. Various patches along the
> river & navigation will be nature reserves. It's a well known haunt of
> Bitterns in the Winter.
>
> Otherwise Middlesex is a bit thin. You can just make out LNRs & SSSIs on
> this map I made from OS Open Data designed to assist biological recording.
> They are shown as a diagonal or cross-hatch. There seem to be a couple up
> near Barnet, and some big ones missing N of Stanmore in Middlesex, and the
> Welsh Harp reservoir isn't shown as one.
>
> The usual sources for finding nature reserves and other places of wildlife
> interest which I use are;
>
> local Wildilife Trust. Usually the organisation with most reserves in a
> given county or group of counties. In your case these are London, Herts  &
> Essex Wildlife Trusts. It's not a bad idea to target getting all the WT
> reserves done.
> local Council. For Country Parks & LNRs.
> local Bird Club. Most bird club websites have quite good accounts of popular
> birding locations. Many of these will be nature reserves.
> local natural history books. Try the local studies section of a public
> library. For instance Herts WT have published very detailed volumes about
> Moths & Plants quite recently. These usually have a good account of
> significant sites which will be more likely than not nature reserves.
> local field club or natural history society. These don't exist everywhere,
> but where they do you are likely to find people extremely familiar with not
> just nature reserves but lots of detail of local topography.
> other conservation orgs: RSPB, Wildlife Trust, WWT, Buglife, Plant Life etc.
> Natural England (lists of LNRs, SSSIs)
>
> Jerry
>
>
> On 5 October 2015 at 09:56, Steve Chilton  wrote:
>>
>> Can you point me to a source for identifying NRs near me (L B of Enfield),
>> and I will try to get out to them and do a bit of boundary and path network
>> mapping where possible?
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> From: SK53 [mailto:sk53@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 05 October 2015 09:29
>> To: Brian Prangle
>> Cc: Talk GB
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Last quarterly project for 2015
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm well in favour of mapping nature reserves, but they usually are quite
>> difficult to find actual boundaries.
>>
>> Nick Whitlegg and I walked through a couple of Woodland Trust areas on
>> Saturday and working out the extent of the area owned by the WT is
>> difficult. Similarly, over another non-OSM matter, I've been exchanging
>> emails with NT Eastern Office about Wicken Fen, but they have added so much
>> new land over the past few years that they dont have a ready to use map of
>> the reserve. Another one is the new RSPB reserve at Medmerry near Selsey,
>> which is the site of a massive managed retreat and new sea wall breach. This
>> was brought to my attention by Liz Scott (@birdmaps). Lastly, I haven't even
>> resolved the bounds of Attenborough NR: the staff now manage the area in
>> Derbyshire labelled Erewash Field on OSM. I don't know if it has been
>> formally incoriporated into the reserve, so the current mapping is a
>> sensible compromise (and yes Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust operate a
>> reserve in Derbyshire).
>>
>> There are Natural England datasets for National NRs, Local NRs and SSSIs.
>> I think these are under OGL these days, but like PRoW or Land Registry
>> inspire data, they may incorporate OS MasterMap data, and I have always
>> treated them as not fully open. Some local authorities have open data
>> showing boundaries of LNRs. Note that NR & SSSI boundaries are often not
>> coincident. NRs depend on either landowner agreement, or willingness to sell
>> land; SSSIs are based on conservation importance. And of course, some NRs
>> have geological SSSIs in their midst which are much smaller than the NR.
>>
>> The second thing which is really important for NRs is to get path networks
>> and access mapped out. Experience shows that even if one wants to start
>> mapping the things the NR is about, having the paths in is a necessary but
>> not sufficient condition for a decent map. Many NRs are very deficient from
>> this point of view (including the big ancient woodlands S of Coventry, such
>> as Wappenbury & Ryton, the last of which I visited at end of August.
>> Similarly both Wyre Forest & Werneth Low which I visited in September lack
>> many paths.
>>
>> There's a lot more to say about NRs, I have already started a draft for
>> the blog to do so inspired by looking at Medmerry.
>>
>> My feeling is that the most value can be added to OSM by improving details
>> of NRs local to individual mappers, and initially, at least path networks
>> (there are probably 10+ km of unmapped paths in Ryton Wood alone).
>>
>> One other ple

Re: [Talk-GB] Spamdalism caught

[Dan S]

Also used by real, normal, new phone numbers in London, such as my
home landline! Please don't assume 0203 means bad things :)

Dan

2015-10-20 7:14 GMT-04:00 Philip Barnes :
> It came as little surprise that they have an 0203 number,  which is a virtual 
> number range as used by 'you've had an accident in the last 3 years' scammers.
>
> I would assume they are not a bricks and mortar business.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
> On Tue Oct 20 12:03:14 2015 GMT+0100, Andy Townsend wrote:
>> On 19/10/2015 17:05, Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) wrote:
>> > FYi, I just reverted a small yet disruptive case of spamdalism by user 
>> > “Office Cleaners London” (did I just invent a new term for OSM?).
>> >
>> > Reverting changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34735686
>> >
>> > Offending changesets: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34468479 and 
>> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34468339
>> >
>> > What should we do with the user “Office Cleaners London”?
>> >
>>
>> I'd send them a polite message via a changeset discussion comment
>> explaining what went wrong with their edit.
>>
>> Perhaps explain that if they're a genuine bricks-and-mortar business
>> that exists in the physical world we'd love to have them in OSM, and
>> perhaps point them at http://onosm.org as a way to get a note added to
>> avoid them having to tangle with one of the OSM editors.  Oddly, the
>> address on their website is up near London Bridge rather than south of
>> Elephant and Castle, which might be something else to mention.
>>
>> Someone "changing a road to be a POI" looks more like a cockup than a
>> conspiracy* to me.  There are spammers adding stuff to OSM (though
>> thankfully more in the USA than here); most are better at it than this.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> * (c) Bernard Ingham
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my Jolla
> ___
> 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] 'Romantic London' - reusing Horwood's 1790's map

[Dan S]

Very nice! The map sync really makes it interesting to explore. My
house is off the side of the map, unfortunately, but where my
university now stands was "Bencroft's Alms Houses" :)

Thanks
Dan


2015-10-27 13:30 GMT+00:00 Andy Mabbett :
> I witnessed a fascinating presentation, this morning, on a project
> which has digitised the first map of London at building level, and
> overlays it with data from other sources:
>
>http://www.romanticlondon.org/
>
> The data sets are freely available, but the British Library claims
> copyright over the map images - I'm sure some of you will have your
> own views about this.
>
> I shall notify the project's creator, Dr Matthew Sangster, about this
> post, and invite him to join this list. He would be a good speaker for
> a future OSM conference.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] 'Romantic London' - reusing Horwood's 1790's map

[Dan S]

2015-10-27 14:40 GMT+00:00 Richard Symonds :
> This is excellent - but didn't the NLS do something similar not long ago?

You mean this? 
http://maps.nls.uk/view/102342014#zoom=6&lat=2270&lon=3124&layers=BT
If so, I can't find a way to switch quickly between OSM-vs-old.
Perhaps it's not georeferenced. Also their maps are later, so
"Bencroft's Alms Houses" had already become "Bancroft's Hospital" ;)

I know the British Library had that crowdsourcing map-warper project,
too. Not sure if there's a slippy-map as with Horwood's - anyone?

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New map style

[Dan S]

2015-10-31 21:57 GMT+00:00 jonathan :
> I don't like it.

I like it :)

Much more legible, less messy, than it was.


> It very simple, the colours should match the road sign colours: Blue, Green,
> Red!

Not obvious to me why that would be a requirement, but I guess it's
fine as a starting point for a UK-only map style... (...which this
isn't!)


> Anything else is just form over function.
>
> Stop playing with aesthetics and concentrate on functionality.

Well, the designers have described their motivation as legibility.
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2015/10/30/openstreetmap-org-map-changing/
Legibility for a rendered map is _indeed_ functionality.

Re Amaroussi's first question, I guess the other thread (the "usable
map service" thread) has acted as the lighting-rod so far?

Best
Dan


> On 31/10/2015 21:37, Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> For some reason, the barrage of complaints I was expecting on this
>> channel, regarding the switch from blue/green/red to rose/red/orange seems
>> to be quiet today. I wonder who is unhappy with the change?
>>
>> I would back blue/green/red being an alternative theme on OSM to calm
>> things down, even though rose/red/orange is a pretty fresh change.
>>
>> — Amaroussi
>> ___
>> 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] Quarterly Project: Nature Reserves

[Dan S]

Hi all,

I went to check out a local nature reserve. It's currently in OSM as a
leisure=park. I would like to tag as leisure=nature_reserve, but this
one is indeed also a publicly accessible park, so I don't like the
idea of removing the park tag.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/188492303
The southern end of it is closed to the public, so at the moment my
inclination is to retag the main polygon as nature_reserve, and to tag
a smaller polygon as park. Any better ideas than that?

Thanks
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project: Nature Reserves

[Dan S]

Top tip Jerry thanks! That came in handy.

I've updated this park/NR now - it's absolutely tiny, two little
slivers of peninsula left over after the train track went through.
That's London for you!
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.51256/0.00376

Dan

2015-11-01 20:58 GMT+00:00 SK53 :
> Hi Brian,
>
> Just use the F key: draw a new line beteeen two nodes on the original
> polygon and then just keep tapping "F", in both P2 and JOSM this should
> follow the first polygon. It's very useful for all sorts of things.
>
> Jerry
>
> On 1 November 2015 at 19:49, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dan and Jerry
>>
>> I've faced similar problems where the park and the nature reserve share
>> the same polygon. It may be a kludge but I copy the original polygon, change
>> the tag to nature_reserve and then manoevre  the copied and re-tagged
>> polygon on top of the original.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> On 1 November 2015 at 18:58, SK53  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> I've resorted to adding another relation to do a nature reserve
>>> (specifically Rum NNR, but also in one or two other places. However I drew
>>> the line at Richmond Park which is also Richmond Park NNR. Perhaps we need
>>> nature_reserve=yes for some of these.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>> On 1 November 2015 at 18:31, Dan S  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I went to check out a local nature reserve. It's currently in OSM as a
>>>> leisure=park. I would like to tag as leisure=nature_reserve, but this
>>>> one is indeed also a publicly accessible park, so I don't like the
>>>> idea of removing the park tag.
>>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/188492303
>>>> The southern end of it is closed to the public, so at the moment my
>>>> inclination is to retag the main polygon as nature_reserve, and to tag
>>>> a smaller polygon as park. Any better ideas than that?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> 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] Quarterly Project: Nature Reserves

[Dan S]

2015-11-02 11:24 GMT+00:00 tshrub :
> Hey Dan,
>
> Dan S schrieb:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I went to check out a local nature reserve. It's currently in OSM as a
>> leisure=park. I would like to tag as leisure=nature_reserve, but this
>> one is indeed also a publicly accessible park, so I don't like the
>> idea of removing the park tag.
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/188492303
>> The southern end of it is closed to the public, so at the moment my
>> inclination is to retag the main polygon as nature_reserve, and to tag
>> a smaller polygon as park. Any better ideas than that?
>
> this area is listed neither in natura2000.eea.europa.eu nor in
> protectedplanet.net.
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Nature-protected-area>
> If
> =4 there would be *active* habitat-/species-management (trespassing
> restrictions) ?
> =5 there are longtime developed or grown and *large* areas with interaction
> of people ("scenic values" - Ecology Park?)
> =7 smaller area, protecting nature-features, like some vegetation ... or for
> recreation (scenic values?)
>
> It seems to me like protect_class=7
> The IUCN-code gave a basic and gives an orientation for OSM, but the
> protect_class doesn't reflect exact the IUCN-code.
>
> So far its possible to add
>
> boundary=protected_area
> + protect_class=7
> + protection_title=Ecology Park
> + name=Bow Creek Ecology Park
> ...
>
>
> *But* in fact:
> on its website the area too looks to a bigger part like a "park", with its
> typical nature-recreation features.
> So on the other hand again leisure=park?

I'm sorry but I don't understand you. I'm confused.
* There's an area (the southern part) which has no public access, for
habitat management.
* The rest of it is park-like, except to be honest it's not very
pretty or scenic! I think it's designed to be a place to educate city
kids about wildlife and nature. Also apparently good for birdwatching.
* The website about the area is misleading, it tries to pretend it's a
"park" in the traditional sense of being a nice place for a gentle
stroll... don't let the website confuse you.

I think you're right that it's not an official nature reserve, but I
don't know what re-tagging is best.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] More questions on Schools project

[Dan S]

2016-01-08 12:22 GMT+00:00 Stuart Reynolds :
> Hi All,
>
> I have some questions about naming, and also the content of Edubase.
>
> In Southend (SS postcode area) there are some schools which have
> “alternative” names by which they are more commonly known. One example is
> Leigh, where the school is always known locally as “Leigh North Street”. So
> should I adopt the Edubase name as the “name” or should I use the local
> name? If the former, what tag should I use to list the alternative?

OSM convention is to prefer "what is on the ground" - the "name" tag
should really be what is written on the sign outside the school. Then
you can use "loc_name" or "alt_name" for the alternative name as
described here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#loc_name

> Of course, tagging with the Edubase reference will help to match, regardless
> of name - I have also used “&” where Edubase has “and”, which currently
> leads to Rob’s table not finding a match. Likewise with e.g. Westcliff High
> School for Boys Academy, where the “Academy” part adds nothing, so I have
> left it off (especially as the three other grammars, including the girls
> school next door, manage without it).
>
> Finally, on tagging, there appear to be some anomalies. The aforementioned
> Leigh is one - this used to be two schools, now merged to be Leigh Primary
> School. Edubase only has one entry, but names it Leigh Infant School. I
> assume that Edubase will catch up, eventually, but for now I will use the
> correct name for the school and tag it with the Infant School URN. The other
> one, which I am struggling with, is Thorpe Greenways. There is only one
> entry in Edubase - Thorpe Greenways Infant School. But according to their
> website (http://www.greenways.southend.sch.uk) the infant and junior schools
> are still two schools, but run as a federation called “The Federation of
> Greenways Schools”. Are they two schools? Or one? Given that they share
> leadership, governors, and budget I would assume one, as does Edubase,
> apparently. Any thoughts?
>
> If someone could also suggest how to tag one school split across two sites,
> I would be very happy!

I like the "site" relation but it's not as widely-used as I might like...
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:site

Best
Dan

> Many thanks
> Regards,
> Stuart
>
>
> ___
> 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] UKOSM - technical aspects

[Dan S]

I was going to wait until later to say exactly what Paul just said...

2016-01-11 6:56 GMT+00:00 Jez Nicholson :
> +1 what Paul said
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 at 06:35, Paul Norman  wrote:
>>
>> On 1/10/2016 1:47 PM, Harry Wood wrote:
>>
>> For an OSMUK website you mean? I have a few ideas about that, and would
>> like to be involved.
>>
>> Certainly I'd like to see something done in an openly editable way so it's
>> not too much of a centralised "request changes from the chief" situation.
>> Code in github is a great way to help with that. Maybe *content* in github
>> too, if we use some file-based system. Although I have some whacky wiki
>> content syndication ideas too.
>>
>> I've just set up an osmuk organisation on github as a placeholder for this
>> stuff:
>>
>> https://github.com/osmuk
>>
>>
>> I strongly recommend some kind of static page generator, e.g. Jekyll.
>> Initially you're unlikely to need anything else, and maintenance is
>> substantially easier than dynamic options.
>>
>> You may later need something involving server-side programming, but no
>> website yet, you should try to get off the ground quickly and leave more
>> complicated features until later.
>>
>> Jekyll also has the advantage that you can use GitHub pages for hosting if
>> you want. It's not always the best option, but if it does work it's one of
>> the lowest maintenance ones.
>> ___
>> 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] Review plan for adding 1, 164 wikidata tags in the West Midlands

[Dan S]

2016-01-17 17:06 GMT+00:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 17 January 2016 at 12:55, Lester Caine  wrote:
>
>> Please remove the School list from this. We are currently adding the
>> edubase references to each of these, and this will replace the need for
>> an additional wikidata tag. Better to just have the one primary reference.
>
> There is no restriction limiting us to add only one identifier, and no
> harm done by adding both. In particular, the EduBase ID does not
> "remove the need" to add a Wikidata ID.

I agree - there is no harm at all in adding both identifiers, and both
are useful. My vote would be please DO include them in your work,
thanks!

A related schools question: the wikidata schools objects often have a
key called "DfE URN", but this seems NOT to be the same identifier as
our edubase references being added in the schools project. I can't
find many examples of schools that are in both lists and which have
"DfE URN" but here's one: Hanley Castle High School with DfE URN
116981  and Edubase identifier
137101 . Do these
two identifiers have any relation to each other?

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Abbreviations in OSM and schools

[Dan S]

2016-01-18 6:50 GMT+00:00 Marc Gemis :
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Lester Caine  wrote:
>> On 17/01/16 20:42, Ed Loach wrote:
>>> So, should we be using the full school name or abbreviating 'church of
>>> england voluntary aided' to CEVA as they do on the school pullovers?
>>> Similar questions for other variations - I've seen CE, CoE, C of E for
>>> example.
>>
>> I've been changing them to match what is listed on edubase for the main
>> name, and retaining an alt_name sometimes.
>
> Isn't this a "mechanical" edit ? Shouldn't we list what is on the
> ground, .i.e. the name that can be found on the entrance in the name
> field ?
> I would put CEVA in short_name.

There is also "official_name" which I think would be useful for the
full, qualified, too-long-for-a-sign name that Ed is asking about:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSMSchools - Tagging question Outdoor Education Centre

[Dan S]

Hi,

I don't have a good answer, but I had a similar problem when trying to
tag a "Go Ape" outdoor centre last year. If you search for "Go Ape"
you find many different taggings around the country, including:

leisure=sports_centre
tourism=attraction
tourism=theme_park
leisure=high_ropes_course
leisure=playground

Possibly one of the top three is suitable for this? I'd like to hear
what other people think.

Best
Dan

2016-01-20 23:17 GMT+00:00  :
> Hi again,
>
> thanks for the responses to my last question.
>
> I'm now trying to correct the tagging for an Outdoor Education Centre. It
> has been tagged (understandably in my point of view) as amenity=school but
> obviously isn't a school. So the question is, what should it be tagged as?
> I've looked through the wiki and can't see anything relevant but I'm aware
> that the knowledge in this group sometimes surpasses that of the wiki.
>
> The centre in question is Lagganlia http://www.lagganlia.com/ near Aviemore
> in the Highlands which is owned by City of Edinburgh. I fondly remember
> going there 3 or 4 times for Geography field trips and school skiing weeks
> 20 years ago.
>
> Thanks in advance for your help.
>
> Al.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Schools Progress Tracker Update

[Dan S]

2016-01-24 11:42 GMT+00:00 Ed Loach :
> Stuart wrote:
>
>> 1 site, 2 schools:
>> • boundary has amenity=school
>> • buildings have school names & e.g. edubase tags. I used amenity=school for
>> the individual buildings though, as well as building=school. It should 
>> probably
>> only be building=school, really, as the site is the amenity. But this way it 
>> gets
>> picked up on the match tool.
>> • I would ideally like to have named the boundary e.g. “Hamstel Schools”
>> or “Chalkwell Schools” but haven’t as that will (for now) lead to a false 
>> “look at” flag.
>
> I think what you describe as what you’d ideally like to do is what I did in 
> those examples I mentioned in my previous email (I can't remember though 
> whether I used building=school or building=yes).
>
>> 1 school, 2 sites.
>>
>> • I used the site relation, via JOSM. I believe that this is the correct way 
>> to do it. I
>> tagged the site relation with the edubase code and names, and the individual 
>> sites
>> with the names of e.g. “XX upper school” and “XX lower school”. However, 
>> these
>> didn’t get matched.
>
> The site relation page however
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site#Proposal
> suggests it should be multipolygon and not site -
> "For example the tag amenity=school describes the perimeter of the school 
> grounds, for schools with multiple sites the multipolygon relation can be 
> used. Usage of a site relation is not appropriate here."

Hi - it's an interesting ambiguity between "multipolygon" and "site".
I actually think the thing you quote is a bit mis-worded, and what
they're trying to say (I'm inferring from the other sentences in the
wiki page...!) is that you should use "multipolygon" to aggregate
multiple buildings (for example) that sit within a single grounds,
whereas you should use "site" to aggregate multiple objects that are
more widely separated ("scattered throughout across the city" is the
wiki guidance).

This shows that OSM could perhaps live without the "site" relation if
people simply used multipolygons. However I think people tend to
assume multipolygons are quite localised, which probably makes a
difference to how they are rendered (e.g. one label for a whole
multipolygon, vs one label for each member of a site).

Anyone else got input on this? I might tweak the wiki, if it seems I'm
not in the wrong.

Best
Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Imports] OSM with Wikidata: 27, 232 matches found in England

[Dan S]

Hi,

All looking interesting! Skimming around some of the data I know and
the vasy majority of it is looking sensible and useful.

I'm curious how The Shard ended up matching against its correct match
but also London Bridge station? The station doesn't seem to have any
matching metadata:
http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/england/region/Greater_London/Apartment_buildings

I managed to find a few erroneous one-to-one matches in London:
Q12048395 — The Queen's Walk (South Bank) — HMS Belfast (way, distance: 5.0 km)
Q55019 — Covent Garden — Royal Opera House (way, distance: 71 m)
Q607700 — Monument to the Great Fire of London — Tower Bridge (node,
distance: 1.4 km)
Q5571009 — Globe Theatre (Newcastle Street) — Shakespeare's Globe
(relation, distance: 2.5 km)
  - note that this one confuses the historic with the modern
theatre of the same name. The modern one has a separate wkp page.
Q43279 — Wembley Stadium (1923) — Wembley Stadium (way, distance: 0 m)
  - again the correct connection should be with the modern stadium
Q3527632 — Dorset Garden Theatre — Queen's (way, distance: 2.8 km)
  - another historic thing (Dorset Garden was called Queen's at one point)

I presume this stuff happens because of the density of things in
London. I could only find one mismatch in the North West:

Q7131478 — Panopticons — The Halo (node, distance: 119 m)
 - The Halo doesn't seem to have a wikipedia entry of its own
(it's one item in the Panopticons series; it is not itself the
series). On further investigation, I discovered that the reason for
this false match is because a wikipedia bot made a mistake in editing
geolocations (see
).


Best
Dan

2016-01-24 11:46 GMT+00:00 Edward Betts :
> I've extended my search for matches between OSM and Wikidata. It now covers
> all of England instead of just the West Midlands.
>
> The results are grouped by region or county as well as by category.
>
> http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/england/
>
> It should be possible to use this a basis for uploading. The results can be
> grouped by category and county when uploaded.
> --
> Edward.
>
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Crediting OSM (was Birdtrack using OSM maps)

[Dan S]

The Sacred Heart is a good example - using openlayers, set up so that
the "(c) OpenStreetMap contributors" is clearly visible. Seems to me
you're doing it right -

Dan


2016-04-27 19:44 GMT+01:00 Colin Spiller :
> Interesting wiki entry. Very technical - at least for me. I have several
> webpages with OSM maps inserted via iframe. For example
> http://www.ourladyandstjoseph.org.uk/SacredHeart.htm When I followed the
> link on the wiki to the example , I just got "page not found". Can anyone
> show me a good example please?
>
> Thanks
> Colin
>
>
>
> On 25/04/16 22:16, ael wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 08:39:31PM +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>>>
>>> I noticed recently that it was using OpenStreetMap data; at my
>>> instigation, it now also prominently credits OSM.
>>
>>
>> I noticed that my local library was using OSM but with no accreditation.
>>
>> When I looked (as I recall, on the wiki) for a link to send them, I had
>> to dig deep and just found this:
>>
>> https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/48/can-i-use-these-maps-on-my-website
>>
>> I seem to remember that the request to credit OSM used to be prominent,
>> but that no longer seems to be the case, so I could understand how it
>> might be overlooked.
>>
>> I sent an polite email on 24th Feb asking them to add the credit, but have
>> had no reply.
>>
>> So perhaps the request for credit needs to be more prominent?
>>
>> Meanwhile, perhaps others might also complain? The offending site is
>> https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/witney-library
>> As you can see there, their email address is
>> witney.libr...@oxfordshire.gov.uk .
>>
>> ael
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
> --
> Colin Spiller
> co...@thespillers.org.uk
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] sport=soccer not sport=football.

[Dan S]

Hi,

I advocate British terminology, and it's very clear that British
English is the standard for OSM. However


Dan


2016-06-13 7:06 GMT+01:00 Jez Nicholson :
> Ah yes 'soccer' as a corruption of 'Association' to distinguish it from the
> other football, 'rugger'. Very timely. A good example of a tag that has
> gained common usage although being incorrect English. I play a lot of
> football and it burns to call it soccer, but needs must.
>
> What is the general consensus on fixing tags?
>
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 at 02:06, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This arises out of my edits targeting sport=football and trying to
>> resolve these into a 'good' value.  'SomeoneElse' suggest this should be
>> discussed here. Well ok.
>> The discussion may disintegrate into 2 things - 'soccer is an
>> Americanism' and 'football is common usage'.
>>
>>  Americanism?
>>
>> Apparently 'soccer' comes from Oxford, England ...
>>
>> http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/06/the-origin-of-the-word-soccer/
>>
>> So not an Americanism.
>>
>> -- Common Usage.  My view.
>> I will support and defend the use of British English.
>> I will support precision in tagging terminology.
>> I do not support confusion.
>>
>> The term 'football' is confusing in world terms (ref
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(word)) and I cannot support it
>> use.
>> And the term 'soccer' is recognised in British English ...
>> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/soccer "A form of
>> football..."
>> Thus a more precise word to use compared to 'football'
>> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/football "Any of
>> various forms of team game involving kicking..."
>> Thus 'football' encompasses many games.
>> The term soccer is precise, well understood (in both British and world
>> terms) and should be used. Precision before what some claim is 'common
>> use' for me.
>>
>> (If you question my support of British English see
>>   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:sport%3Dshot-put .. and
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Jewellery_shop)
>>
>>  OSM Usage - to demonstrate British majority
>> agreement.
>>
>> Some samples using overpass turbo .
>> (Chose a small area so it does not time out - particularly for soccer, I
>> picked these at random to give a sample .. feel free to do your own)
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/
>> Use the wizard enter 'sport=football' and then run, repeat with wizard
>> 'sport=soccer' - numerical results at bottom right of the screen.
>> Results:
>> London area ~200 football ~10,000 soccer
>> Birmingham area ~16 football ~2,400 soccer
>> Liverpool-Manchester area ~130 football ~6,600 soccer
>> Glasgow- Edinburgh area ~80 football ~6,500 soccer
>>
>> The vast majority use soccer!  Say ~98% soccer and ~2% football.
>> I would think there is a majority support for sport=soccer here too.
>>
>>  What I think should be done.
>> There is a small improvement to OSM data consistency and understanding
>> to be had by looking at all the features using the tag
>> sport=football
>> and changing it to
>> sport=soccer
>> where it can be determined that the sport is actually soccer.
>> Where that cannot be determined a fixme tag could be placed to indicate
>> further work.
>> I am not proposing some automated edit ... each needs to be 'looked at'
>> visually by a human!
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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